Another Step Forward for Gateway Mall on Woodward Avenue just south of 8 Mile

[Bham1982]

Yes, let's hope and pray for continued disinvestment as a strategy to move us forward. That'll show 'em how the free market spins its magic.

If this site were a solid bet for retail, the developers wouldn't be dependent on millions in taxpayer subsidies to move forward.

I don't see how we "move forward" as a region by directing scarce resources to more empty retail space. You have the Northland area, just to the west [[and a much better location in terms of local demographics and traffic counts) as a totally failed retail location. There are very significant amounts of empty retail all along 8 Mile.

If I were Emporer of All, I might direct tax dollars to revitalazation of smaller-scale, neighborhood-oriented retail along Livernois. The areas just to the east of Livernois are the most affluent in Detroit, and could support improved neighborhood retail. A stronger Livernois would likely result in significant improvements in neighborhood retail and residential values.

In contrast, the region doesn't need more giant big box centers, especially if we're talking corridors with tons of empty big box retail. If Target wants a store along 8 Mile, they already have a large number of [[non-taxpayer subsidized) options.

[ghettopalmetto]

If this site were a solid bet for retail, the developers wouldn't be dependent on millions in taxpayer subsidies to move forward.

You could say the same for any suburban Walmart or Meijer.

[Bham1982]

You could say the same for any suburban Walmart or Meijer.

I'm not aware of any taxpayer subsidized suburban big box developments. Which malls are you referring to?

[ghettopalmetto]

I'm not aware of any taxpayer subsidized suburban big box developments. Which malls are you referring to?

You mean Walmart builds the roads that lead to its properties?

Walmart widens existing roads into highways, and builds freeway interchanges to access its stores?

Walmart pays to extend water, sewer, and electrical service to its locations?

Walmart pays for necessary upgrades to water treatment plants caused by the acres of impervious pavement it adds to the watershed?

Walmart never sued for a property tax abatement?

Sounds like you need to educate yourself a bit. It's not that you're unaware; it's that you're so enraptured in the suburban way of life that you're deliberately oblivious.

[Gistok]

GP.... I'm not saying what Bham1982 is right... but in your argument aren't you basically just describing every single commercial business in the country... both urban and suburban?

[Bham1982]

You mean Walmart builds the roads that lead to its properties?

Your scenario is completely different.

Yes, obviously Walmart benefits from road improvements, and from investments in safety, prosperity and cleanliness, for example. These are indirect benefits.

With Gateway Mall, the developers are receiving a direct subsidy for construction of their big box stores.

Gateway Mall developers are already benefitting from the road improvements to 8 Mile/Woodward, from the investments in neighborhood stability in nearby neighborhoods, etc.

The issue is whether taxpayers should send them a check them to build more big box. It has nothing to do with urban/suburban.

[ghettopalmetto]

GP.... I'm not saying what Bham1982 is right... but in your argument aren't you basically just describing every single commercial business in the country... both urban and suburban?

Walmart, because it tends to pick undeveloped parcels of land, requires brand-new all-of-these-things in almost every case.

[ghettopalmetto]

Your scenario is completely different.

Yes, obviously Walmart benefits from road improvements, and from investments in safety, prosperity and cleanliness, for example. These are indirect benefits.

With Gateway Mall, the developers are receiving a direct subsidy for construction of their big box stores.

Walmart received $1.875 million in Community Development Block Grants for construction of its distribution facility in Coldwater, Michigan. Is that that same?

[Bham1982]

Walmart received $1.875 million in Community Development Block Grants for construction of its distribution facility in Coldwater, Michigan. Is that that same?

From the State's perspective, no, because it's a distribution facility, not a big box store.

A distribution facility provides net benefits to the state. The subsidy might make economic sense.

A big box store just redirects existing spending, and generally provides no net benefits to the state [[something like Cabela's or Somerset might be exceptions, because of considerable non-resident spending).

[ghettopalmetto]

From the State's perspective, no, because it's a distribution facility, not a big box store.

A distribution facility provides net benefits to the state. The subsidy might make economic sense.

A big box store just redirects existing spending, and generally provides no net benefits to the state [[something like Cabela's or Somerset might be exceptions, because of considerable non-resident spending).

Show your math, please. How much revenue has the State of Michigan realized as a direct result of its investment in the Walmart distribution facility?

Your second point is precisely why I'm not a fan of this Gateway development. Like any other big box center, it has to function at a regional scale to be profitable. Which means that it essentially needs to poach shoppers from a wide-ranging area in order to be successful. We've seen this story before.

[Bham1982]

Show your math, please.

What math? How does a big box development provide the state with net new tax dollars?

Are folks going to buy more tube socks, or will they buy tube socks from a new location? It's just a retail musical chairs.

[bartock]

it goes without saying that if you build something anti-urban on the site, it will REMAIN anti-urban. The only way to urbanize it is to [[surprise!) build urban form.

Your line of reasoning is a Mobius strip [[mall) of self-fulfilling prophecy. You can't keep building strip malls and then wonder why Detroit isn't more urban.

OK so when the flying monkeys drop an A-Bomb on Woodward from 7 Mile north to 8 mile, and the purple unicorns carrying pixie-dust and $20 billion dollars pay to turn Woodward back into a four lane road, remove "the bridge" and make 8 Mile/Woodward a four way stop, while Santa's elves build this Magical Kingdom of Urbania that the people of this region will undoubtably want to flock to in what has always been a decidedly suburban area, I will agree with you. Until then, something is better than nothing.

[1953]

I'm with the urbanists on this one - we have to stop allowing suburban style developments within city limits. Detroit competes for residents on its urbanity and nothing else. If I want to live by a Meijer, I'll move to the one on the old VA site off 94 and enjoy the comforts of mass retail.

[softailrider]

If this site were a solid bet for retail, the developers wouldn't be dependent on millions in taxpayer subsidies to move forward.

I don't see how we "move forward" as a region by directing scarce resources to more empty retail space. You have the Northland area, just to the west [[and a much better location in terms of local demographics and traffic counts) as a totally failed retail location. There are very significant amounts of empty retail all along 8 Mile.

If I were Emporer of All, I might direct tax dollars to revitalazation of smaller-scale, neighborhood-oriented retail along Livernois. The areas just to the east of Livernois are the most affluent in Detroit, and could support improved neighborhood retail. A stronger Livernois would likely result in significant improvements in neighborhood retail and residential values.

In contrast, the region doesn't need more giant big box centers, especially if we're talking corridors with tons of empty big box retail. If Target wants a store along 8 Mile, they already have a large number of [[non-taxpayer subsidized) options.

Have you seen the retail along Livernois lately? It's mostly a huge joke - wig shops, African hair braiding places, nail salons, empty storefronts. Sometimes two or three per block. Obvilously, that area can't support any decent retail anymore.

[mwilbert]

Have you seen the retail along Livernois lately? It's mostly a huge joke - wig shops, African hair braiding places, nail salons, empty storefronts. Sometimes two or three per block. Obvilously, that area can't support any decent retail anymore.

I have. What do you expect to see in neighborhood retail strips nowadays? Service shops, like hair and nail salons and dry cleaners, banks, drug stores, food, picture framing/galleries, boutiques, pet stores, shoe shops, liquor stores.. And some empty shops. That's basically what's on Livernois. There are a couple of things missing that one might expect--no hardware store, for instance, but basically it's what I would expect. Between the big boxes and the internet, that's what small-scale retail is now. The neighborhoods around Livernois are reasonably affluent, but hardly rich and the retail reflects that. It's the same kind of stuff that is in the neighborhood retail strips of your average affluent suburb, including the empty storefronts, but a bit more downscale.

[Det_ard]

I'm with the urbanists on this one - we have to stop allowing suburban style developments within city limits. Detroit competes for residents on its urbanity and nothing else. If I want to live by a Meijer, I'll move to the one on the old VA site off 94 and enjoy the comforts of mass retail.

It's an awfully big city, much of which is suburban in nature, not urban. The family living at State Fair and John R would love some nearby shopping and I doubt they care about the stuff most urbanists pine for. Give them a Meijer close by and save the urbanist fashion statements for midtown, downtown, corktown, etc.

[antongast]

It's an awfully big city, much of which is suburban in nature, not urban. The family living at State Fair and John R would love some nearby shopping and I doubt they care about the stuff most urbanists pine for. Give them a Meijer close by and save the urbanist fashion statements for midtown, downtown, corktown, etc.

It's about function, not fashion, there's no inherent reason why a Meijer's has to be designed in any particular way, and if by "suburban" you mean "surrounded by acres of parking," there really aren't that many parts of Detroit that are designed that way.

[Det_ard]

It's about function, not fashion, there's no inherent reason why a Meijer's has to be designed in any particular way, and if by "suburban" you mean "surrounded by acres of parking," there really aren't that many parts of Detroit that are designed that way.

There's no reason why a retail development at 8/Woodward should be like what you'd put near WSU. And there aren't many parts of Detroit that look like suburban retail because obviously Detroit was largely built out before suburban retail development patterns existed. Today, large swaths of Detroit don't have the density to support urban retail, and they do have ample land in which to build suburban style strip-malls or seas of parking, should the demand exist.

[eastland]

I just hope it doesn't turn into another Shoppes at Jefferson Village -- more than 90 percent vacant after 10 years.

[antongast]

There's no reason why a retail development at 8/Woodward should be like what you'd put near WSU. And there aren't many parts of Detroit that look like suburban retail because obviously Detroit was largely built out before suburban retail development patterns existed. Today, large swaths of Detroit don't have the density to support urban retail, and they do have ample land in which to build suburban style strip-malls or seas of parking, should the demand exist.

This is a strange argument. There's ample land for a nuclear waste dump in the Grand Canyon, and the demand probably exists for one there, but that doesn't make it a good idea.

[ghettopalmetto]

There's no reason why a retail development at 8/Woodward should be like what you'd put near WSU.

I can think of several reasons why it HAS to be:

1. Land. Seas of parking cost money, not only to buy, but on the property tax rolls as well. The less money an owner can spend on property, the higher the likelihood a development project is feasible. The less dependent upon parking and automobiles, the less propensity for the development to generate heavy volumes of traffic congestion.

2. Attractiveness. The more aesthetically pleasing the building, the more likely it is to draw traffic; an "urban" building can command higher rents than a run-down strip mall. Depending on the design, the space can be more flexible too, whether for retail, office, or residential. How many strip malls contain apartments??? The development also becomes a better neighbor.

3. Competitiveness. Detroit cannot replicate its suburbs and expect to reasonably succeed. Because of tax rates, city services, demographics, and other factors, it's sheer idiocy to pretend that the playing field is level between Detroit and its suburbs. Pursuing suburban-style development is a battle Detroit will never win.

[softailrider]

I have. What do you expect to see in neighborhood retail strips nowadays? Service shops, like hair and nail salons and dry cleaners, banks, drug stores, food, picture framing/galleries, boutiques, pet stores, shoe shops, liquor stores.. And some empty shops. That's basically what's on Livernois. There are a couple of things missing that one might expect--no hardware store, for instance, but basically it's what I would expect. Between the big boxes and the internet, that's what small-scale retail is now. The neighborhoods around Livernois are reasonably affluent, but hardly rich and the retail reflects that. It's the same kind of stuff that is in the neighborhood retail strips of your average affluent suburb, including the empty storefronts, but a bit more downscale.

I suppose I agree with you to a certain degree. However, I remember the retail on that street years ago, it was way better then it is now. Basically, you could get most of what you would need to live on a daily basis right on that street. It actually was a destination area that people went to shop. You absolutely can't say that now.There were jewlery stores, men's furnishing stores, ladies clothing stores, MD and DDS offices [[ the Dentist I went to had his office that street) and many other varied shops. There sure wasn't an abundance of wig shops 2 and 3 to a block.

I guess what I'm trying to say is the retail on those blocks of Livernois has taken a huge, very noticable downturn from the way it used to be. One can only assume, if that area could now support a jewlery store, you wouldn't have to go elsewhere to get a battery for your watch installed.

[mwilbert]

No disagreement here. The area used to support much higher end retail. Some of that is the lower incomes in the area, and some of that is the rise of two-earner, two-car [[or more families) and the resulting change in shopping patterns. There just isn't that much retail that makes sense on those kinds of strips anymore, which I think is bad because I like walking around and having occupied storefronts makes the walking more interesting. I'd much rather walk down Livernois [[and I do) than walk down the east side of Woodward between 7 and 8, and that will be true whether or not the Gateway Shoppes arrive or not.

[GoGrixdale]

...but if it was just across the Bifröst bridge, in Ferndale, it'd be a success. I mean really, theres not a more diversely traveled [[top street) boarder crossing in Detroit. Ultimately it will boil down to the comfort level that can be instilled in commuters.

One of the best tenants possible would be the 12th precinct.

[GoGrixdale]

Over-Under pool?

3/27/2012
Groundbreaking planned for shopping center bringing Meijer to Detroit