Brush Park, M1, whole foods, Brewster Demo and the Possible Red Wings area

[TexasT]

How does this support light rail? Wouldn't Houston be a good example of why not to build light rail?

They built a single line in Houston, ridership sucks [[lower than the current Woodward bus ridership in Detroit), so now they're considering spending even more on light rail, hoping eventually ridership doesn't suck

Oh, and downtown revitalization? Since they opened the light rail on Houston's Main Street, the Macys closed [[last major store downtown), as did a number of nearby retail outlets. I thought rail transit was supposed to revitalize downtowns?

Serious question - have you ever been to Houston? Because your description of what's going on downtown is way off.

That Macy's was old and decrepit. I lived downtown and never went there. It needs to be torn down and rebuilt. Just look at the outside of it and imagine how nice the inside was:



[[EDIT: Macy's plans to reopen in a newer, smaller store in downtown. They are going to tear this old building down, thank god. It's awful.)

Last of the retail? Hardly. They built the 560,000 square foot Houston Pavilions in the heart of downtown [[hey, right by the light rail!) in 07 or 08.





God bless em, they can't get away from the strip mall feel but it's got plenty of major retail [[Forever 21, H&M, BCBG, etc), restaurants [[including Yao Ming's restaurant and House of Blues), a trendy bowling alley [[much like Ten in Chicago), and it made to be walkable, with raised walkways from block to block. And pointing out anything regarding retail ignores the way Houston's core is split into two, with the Central Business District and the Shopping/Retail District with the Galleria; the shopping district is way too established for downtown to compete for major retailers. That's like being over near the Sears Tower in Chicago and lamenting the lack of retail in the area. Still, retail is getting better in the business district and some retailers are now returning but mostly it's going to be boutiques that can't afford the Galleria area but still have something to offer in a unique shopping experience.

As far as entertainment, there are several independent bars and restaurants that have sprung up on Main Street [[hey right by the train line!). No, they aren't "major" chains for the most part but they are pretty nice and I prefer them over the TGIF and Applebees types. Google bars in downtown and you'll see [[bars in red, train line in green, new retail center in blue circle):



Downtown actually has a nightlife. As little as 15 years ago when I'd intern downtown in high school, that place shut down at 5 pm. Now there are people hanging out well into the night.



Houston's train line could be more successful. It doesn't run through any neighborhoods except West University, which is akin to Indian Village [[and even there, it skirts the edge). Not the type of people that will take the train daily [[although I did when I rented in West U). It entirely skips Houston's Midtown. It skips Houston's 40K-student U of Houston. Despite all of that, Houston's line still averages 37K people a day. Detroit's train will service its Midtown as well as a 30K-student WSU. I think it will be better off.

[TexasT]

Are the Crosswinds those ones near Comerica? Sort of looks like an apartment complex? I typically hate those types but really, they aren't bad. They at least walk out on to the street, like a typical walkup.

We looked at those [[assuming those are what y'all are referring to) when we bought last summer. They went typically in the 80K-110K range but for that price, I could get a bigger home with character in Woodbridge [[and built a lot sturdier) so that's what we went with.

I guess prices are going up. This one just sold last month for $140K.

[Eber Brock Ward]

Lol. Flawless victory. I've been down Main Street in Houston and a whole bunch of lofts and apartments have sprung up, as well as bars and restaurants to service them. Think Greektown with a rail line and residential, but more geared toward residents than suburbanites and tourists.

[jaytheory]

So is Crosswinds going to demolish the units they built that were never sold and sit abandoned before they build NEW units in Brush Park ??

Brush Park will be converted to "Brush Parking Lot" when they build the hockeyball stadium.

Most of are occupied not sure what you are talking about

[Bham1982]

Lol. Flawless victory. I've been down Main Street in Houston and a whole bunch of lofts and apartments have sprung up, as well as bars and restaurants to service them. Think Greektown with a rail line and residential, but more geared toward residents than suburbanites and tourists.

And don't forget the closed Macys, the shuttered retail, and lower rail ridership in Houston than one bus line in Detroit.

And the Houston Pavillions, claimed as a light rail success, isn't even on the light rail line, and has tons of vacancies.

Also don't forget the whole correlation-causation problem. If a loft opens after the light rail, everyone here will attribute it to the light rail, but if one opened before the light rail, no one will attribute it to the absense of light rail.

[TexasT]

And don't forget the closed Macys, the shuttered retail, and lower rail ridership in Houston than one bus line in Detroit.

Did you read the link? It closed because that building absolutely sucks and they are going to reopen in a smaller, newer building that makes sense for an urban environment. It was like a morgue in there with low ceilings and bad [[no) lighting. In case you did not understand how wretched that building is, inside and out:



As to your point of the ridership of the Woodward bus, I think that bodes well for the success of the Woodward line, no? It's a popular route. Houston's Main Street is not a major corridor like Woodward. Detroit has so much more to gain from a light rail line down its main artery than even Houston with its line [[which again, serves 37K people a day without even hitting major neighborhoods. In a city that has a huge car culture. In a city that sits at 100 degrees with 100% humidity for extended periods of time in the summer. In a city with half the density of Detroit.)

And the Houston Pavillions, claimed as a light rail success, isn't even on the light rail line, and has tons of vacancies.

You serious, Clark? Light rail in yellow, Pavillions in blue. Have you been to Houston? Have you ridden the rail line?



The office portion of the Pavillions is fully leased and the retail is at about 65%, which is lower than they'd like, but there are still plenty of new open places there. Again, the CBD is not going to be able to compete with the retail district of Houston - but bars and restaurants are doing just fine, of which there are 10 or so in the Pavillions alone.

Also don't forget the whole correlation-causation problem. If a loft opens after the light rail, everyone here will attribute it to the light rail, but if one opened before the light rail, no one will attribute it to the absense of light rail.

How exactly would you like us to show you how rail can be successful if you refuse to consider any actual examples of development along transit stops? If you have a path where there's little-to-no development, and then you put in transit, and then you start to see development sprout up along the transit stops, I think we can all use our common sense there. Of course, the conclusion is subject to rebuttals but your wholescale exemption of any real-life examples is a bit misguided.

Nobody is saying that transit and transit alone creates this development, mind you. Yes, it is a variety of factors. I've noticed the tendency of people on this site to let the enemy of the good be the great. "If a solution doesn't fully take care of the problem, then don't implement it!"

"Did we slash Council's perks?" "That's only $6M, a drop in the bucket!"
"Lease Belle Isle?" "That's only $6M, a drop in the bucket!"
"Hey a small advertising agency is opening downtown!" "It's only 40 people and they won't move down there, a drop in the bucket!"
"Hey, a light rail system funded primarily by private businesses!" "It won't completely revitalize downtown on its own, a drop in the bucket!"

Other cities have been collecting those drops for decades and now have a full bucket, just so you know...

[TexasT]

And as of 2007, the Woodward Bus line takes 31K people a day. So unless it increased 25% over the last five years while Detroit's population plummeted, that's less than Houston's 37K/day on its light rail, even with the constraints I noted [[hits no major neighborhoods, misses UH and Midtown, sweltering weather, car culture, lack of density).

Approximately 31,000 people currently ride the buses that go up and down Woodward each day. That's more people than ride the new light rail lines in Minneapolis [[16,000), Salt Lake City [[19,000) and Denver [[28,000 on two lines), and nearly as many as Dallas [[42,000 over two lines). Transportation Riders United, a non-profit dedicated to improving mass transit in metro Detroit, estimates a Woodward light rail line would attract between 40,000 and 50,000 riders a day.

http://www.modeldmedia.com/features/wtransit77.aspx

[Islandman]

Did you read the link? It closed because that building absolutely sucks and they are going to reopen in a smaller, newer building that makes sense for an urban environment. It was like a morgue in there with low ceilings and bad [[no) lighting. In case you did not understand how wretched that building is, inside and out:



As to your point of the ridership of the Woodward bus, I think that bodes well for the success of the Woodward line, no? It's a popular route. Houston's Main Street is not a major corridor like Woodward. Detroit has so much more to gain from a light rail line down its main artery than even Houston with its line [[which again, serves 37K people a day without even hitting major neighborhoods. In a city that has a huge car culture. In a city that sits at 100 degrees with 100% humidity for extended periods of time in the summer. In a city with half the density of Detroit.)



You serious, Clark? Light rail in yellow, Pavillions in blue. Have you been to Houston? Have you ridden the rail line?



The office portion of the Pavillions is fully leased and the retail is at about 65%, which is lower than they'd like, but there are still plenty of new open places there. Again, the CBD is not going to be able to compete with the retail district of Houston - but bars and restaurants are doing just fine, of which there are 10 or so in the Pavillions alone.



How exactly would you like us to show you how rail can be successful if you refuse to consider any actual examples of development along transit stops? If you have a path where there's little-to-no development, and then you put in transit, and then you start to see development sprout up along the transit stops, I think we can all use our common sense there. Of course, the conclusion is subject to rebuttals but your wholescale exemption of any real-life examples is a bit misguided.

Nobody is saying that transit and transit alone creates this development, mind you. Yes, it is a variety of factors. I've noticed the tendency of people on this site to let the enemy of the good be the great. "If a solution doesn't fully take care of the problem, then don't implement it!"

"Did we slash Council's perks?" "That's only $6M, a drop in the bucket!"
"Lease Belle Isle?" "That's only $6M, a drop in the bucket!"
"Hey a small advertising agency is opening downtown!" "It's only 40 people and they won't move down there, a drop in the bucket!"
"Hey, a light rail system funded primarily by private businesses!" "It won't completely revitalize downtown on its own, a drop in the bucket!"

Other cities have been collecting those drops for decades and now have a full bucket, just so you know...

Texas, you could fly him out there and our resident know-it-all still wouldn't agree with you.

[bailey]

And as of 2007, the Woodward Bus line takes 31K people a day. So unless it increased 25% over the last five years while Detroit's population plummeted, that's less than Houston's 37K/day on its light rail, even with the constraints I noted [[hits no major neighborhoods, misses UH and Midtown, sweltering weather, car culture, lack of density).



http://www.modeldmedia.com/features/wtransit77.aspx

Does a bus run the same route as the line in Texas? Just curious because it would seem we're going to run buses and a tram along the same line...If I understand the very limited rights of the RTA to arrange the lines.

[Bham1982]

Did you read the link? It closed because that building absolutely sucks and they are going to reopen in a smaller, newer building that makes sense for an urban environment.

First, no, this isn't true. Macys closed and they have no plans for a new store in downtown Houston.

Second, I don't even know what you mean by "smaller newer building that makes sense for an urban environment". Since when were urban department stores characterized by their "smaller, newer" vibe? Downtown stores tend to be the oldest and largest.

And third, you're missing my point. I don't think that Macys closed because they opened light rail. My point is that you're attributing every positive thing that's happened in downtown Houston to light rail, with no evidence that there's any causal relationship, while ignoring all the negative things that have happened at the same time.

[TexasT]

Does a bus run the same route as the line in Texas? Just curious because it would seem we're going to run buses and a tram along the same line...If I understand the very limited rights of the RTA to arrange the lines.

I don't believe there ever was a "Main Street Bus Line" because the way Houston is set up, it's not a main thoroughfare, despite the name [[maybe it was back in the day, I guess). There are bus routes that cover Main Street though, like the "South Main Bus", which covers the southern portion of what the train line does [[from Wheeler through the museums, Rice University, and medical center) and the "North Main Bus," which covers the northern portion through downtown Houston. There is a small section of Main in between those two lines that is not covered by bus, Main is not a perfect comparison to Woodward. Main doesn't hit a lot of neighborhoods, none really. Detroit was setup very well for train lines; Houston, not so much. Still, it's been a positive development.

[TexasT]

First, no, this isn't true. Macys closed and they have no plans for a new store in downtown Houston.

Ok. Just ignore the links. You sort of lost credibility in discussions about what's going on in Houston, friend, when you didn't even know where our train line went. That's ok - I have no idea what's going on in Pittsburgh. That's why I don't post about it.

Second, I don't even know what you mean by "smaller newer building that makes sense for an urban environment". Since when were urban department stores characterized by their "smaller, newer" vibe? Downtown stores tend to be the oldest and largest.

Um, yes, the OLD ones built in a different era, a la the ugly Macy's in Houston, are big. New, urban-oriented stores are small. I realize Birmingham isn't really the place for things like City Targets, like they were building in Chicago when I left, but small is the new big for urban downtowns.

"As young Americans move to cities, retailers that grew up in the suburbs are following them. And unlike previous efforts, they are doing it the cities’ way. With little room to expand in the suburbs, retailers, including Office Depot, Wal-Mart and Target, are betting that opening small city stores will help their growth.

It is a significant shift from their approach in the past, when they tried to cram their big-box formats into cities, often prompting big fights. This time, the retailers studied city dwellers with anthropological intensity and overhauled things as varied as store sizes [[the city stores are a small fraction of the size of the suburban ones), packages [[they must be compact enough for pedestrians) and signs [[they are simple, so shoppers can get in and out within minutes)."

Link. Same thing they said regarding the Macy's in downtown Houston: "“After further investigation by the building’s owner, no financially feasible scenario was found for maintaining a smaller store in the old structure,” Bob Eury, executive director for the Houston Downtown Management District, said in Mayor Parker's statement. “A new location is our only option, and quite frankly, a new, smaller store will bode better for downtown in the long run.”"

Linked above. Yes, if we're talking 8 & Woodward, put in a full size Meijers. If we're talking about dense, urban areas, you're looking at specialized, smaller City Targets:




Or a Walmart Express:




I was really confused when people kept saying there are no grocers or stores in Detroit until I realized they were applying a suburban mentality to an urban center. I shop at Ye Olde Butcher Shoppe and CVS, smaller, urban-oriented stores, exactly like I did in Chicago [[except it was Olivia's and CVS). I would not expect - or want - a full-sized Meijers to be plopped down in Midtown. Even the new Detroit Whole Foods is half the size of a suburban WF - that's just how you do things in a denser area of the city with urban characteristics.

And third, you're missing my point. I don't think that Macys closed because they opened light rail. My point is that you're attributing every positive thing that's happened in downtown Houston to light rail, with no evidence that there's any causal relationship, while ignoring all the negative things that have happened at the same time.

I clearly said, in the very post you responded to: "Nobody is saying that transit and transit alone creates this development, mind you." Why does that statement make you think that I am attributing "every positive thing that's happened in downtown Houston to light rail"?

[Bham1982]

Ok. Just ignore the links. You sort of lost credibility in discussions about what's going on in Houston, friend, when you didn't even know where our train line went.

You're now just making up stuff. There's no basis for any of your claims.

Again, there is no new Macys in Downtown Houston. The current Macys closed, and there is no new Macys being planned. This all happend after the light rail was built.

The light rail runs down Main Street, which is where the closed Macys sits [[yet you claim there's no relationship between the two), and then you claimed the half-empty Houston Pavillions [[which isn't even on the light rail) should be attributed to the light rail route.

Um, yes, the OLD ones built in a different era, a la the ugly Macy's in Houston, are big. New, urban-oriented stores are small.

No. Urban stores are typically big stores. I have never heard of downtown department stores being small. They are usually flagship sized stores.

Please show us a major U.S. city where the downtown department stores are the small stores, and the suburban and rural department stores are the big stores.

Houston's Macys closed because it wasn't making money. It has nothing to do with "too big" or anything. It wasn't even "too big", because they had closed off a bunch of floors. Macys has no plans for anything in downtown Houston.

And I have no idea why you're going on about Office Depot, CityTarget, and the like. We're talking about department stores. What does Office Depot have to do with Macys and urban department store flagships?

[TexasT]

Ok, you are clearly trolling now. Took me a second.

Texas, you could fly him out there and our resident know-it-all still wouldn't agree with you.

Point taken!

[Bham1982]

Ok, you are clearly trolling now. Took me a second.

Yes, how dare I infect this thread with facts!

Carry on, as you were saying, the biggest cities have the smallest department stores, light rail shouldn't be judged on ridership, and all downtown successes should be attributed to light rail, though downtown failures shouldn't...

[Eber Brock Ward]

lol bham, why the "department stores" strawman, when the traditional department store is in its death throes as a retail concept [[did you not read the ny times article she posted: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/26/bu...TE1FRPZoN4IcIA) and macy's is already in discussions about "relocating Macy's into a smaller space within the city's core"?

what's next, will you criticize because there are no buggy whip stores opening up on the light rail line?

[canuck]

Bham1982, TexasT is right about smaller department stores, Montreal has 6 department stores and 10 shopping malls downtown all competing with smaller street retailers/boutiques. The trend has been to offer boutique style shopping within the largest stores for a long time. The big ones that didnt follow that route closed and reopened under other banners with boutique style divisions. The reason again is that street and mall retailers are nimble and the brand recognition is as strong if not stronger than the big retailers. People want H&M and Sephora, and Lululemon more than they do Sears or The Bay when it comes to fashion.

Simpsons dept store in Montreal closed and was picked up by a small dept store from Quebec City; Simons', and they only use a couple of stories of the old building. Les Ailes de la Mode took up the old Eaton's dept store which was a 9 floor establishment. They only used four. I could give you more examples.

[canuck]

And as transit goes, if the metro and suburban rail, good bus service didnt exist pouring people in from off-island suburbs, the retail would all be in suburban malls, of course. In fact like Toronto's path, the underground reso system here provides access to these stores as well as cinemas arts and music venues, museums, apt buildings etc... You could step out of your apartment in some cases and never have to go outside to do your groceries, etc...

Light rail will make a difference in Detroit, maybe not in Birmingham.

[Bham1982]

lol bham, why the "department stores" strawman, when the traditional department store is in its death throes as a retail concept [[did you not read the ny times article she posted: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/26/bu...TE1FRPZoN4IcIA) and macy's is already in discussions about "relocating Macy's into a smaller space within the city's core"?

what's next, will you criticize because there are no buggy whip stores opening up on the light rail line?

First, you're misusing "strawman".

Second, you think Macys [[right on the light rail hub) is irrelevent, but the other developments [[not on the light rail line) are examples of transit-oriented development? Huh?

Third, Macys is NOT relocating in downtown Houston. The mayor announced a committee to "explore alternatives" which means nothing. Macys is done.

Fourth, the NY Times article is NOT talking about department stores. It's talking about suburban big box and attempts at relocating downtown.

Fifth, somehow big traditional department stores are opening up in urban centers all over the place [[Macys in the Bronx, Nordstrom in Manhattan, Bloomingdales in Soho, Santa Monica, and San Francisco) yet apparently they're "horse and buggy" when they close.

Somehow Macys Corp is throwing off huge profits and is investing billions in downtown stores [[a half billion in Macys 34th Street alone, and nearly that amount in Bloomingdales 59th Street), but when they fail in Houston, or Detroit, its obviously because people no longer shop in department stores, right? Been to Somerset lately?

[Bham1982]

Bham1982, TexasT is right about smaller department stores

No, he's actually wrong, and I should know, because, to some extent, it's my business.

The largest department stores, all of them, are in downtown districts. This is true in the U.S., in Canada, in Europe, and in Japan. I don't know about the rest of the world.

If I listed the 10 largest Macys stores, they would all be in central business districts. If I listed the smallest stores, they would all be rural or exurban stores. There's a direct relationship between urbanity and store size.

Macys in Downtown Houston failed because it wasn't making enough money. It wasn't a big store anyways, because they had closed off a number of floors a couple years back.

[canuck]

The largest department stores are obviously all situated in downtowns, nobodey is debating that, the issue is about the trend toward smaller sized stores, so we are back to square one, since you conclude by saying essentially the same thing.

But about transit and its relative importance in the equation; dont you think that a rail line makes a difference over bus routes on a street like Woodward?

I mean can you imagine that even for a moment, setting aside emotional attachment to the status quo?

[TexasT]

First, you're misusing "strawman".

Second, you think Macys [[right on the light rail hub) is irrelevent, but the other developments [[not on the light rail line) are examples of transit-oriented development? Huh?

Did you look at the map? How are you possibly saying that the other developments are not on the rail? They are directly on the line.

Third, Macys is NOT relocating in downtown Houston. The mayor announced a committee to "explore alternatives" which means nothing. Macys is done.

Macy's closed THIS month - they have said "no comment" but the leader of the downtown planning corp has said that Macy's is looking for new space. I've posted links to that - you've posted nothing but your opinion about a store in a city that it sounds like you've never even been to.

Macy's closed because it was too big, ugly, unattractive, musty, and city-dwellers don't like department stores. Why do you think Chicago's are in the tourist area? Bucktown/Wicker Park had great shopping, chains even, no department stores. That's the future for these high density areas that are attracting young people who want that urban experience. For suburbanites who want to go to a mall in a different city, yes, a huge old Macy's will do. We have that in Houston's Galleria.

Fourth, the NY Times article is NOT talking about department stores. It's talking about suburban big box and attempts at relocating downtown.

Same principles apply. We're talking about stores that service the surrounding community, not tourist attractions. If you are going on a shopping "expedition" in Houston, you go to the Galleria area where there are big [[old) stores. But when you're talking about shopping for that population that's moving back into the old downtowns, no, that's not working.

Fifth, somehow big traditional department stores are opening up in urban centers all over the place [[Macys in the Bronx, Nordstrom in Manhattan, Bloomingdales in Soho, Santa Monica, and San Francisco) yet apparently they're "horse and buggy" when they close.

Big traditional department stores?

The Bronx is opening a small [[160K sq ft) Macy's on the end of the borough in a shopping mall. This store is smaller than usual, as the trend currently goes. The Macy's that closed in Houston was originally 800K sf, and tried to pare down to 500K sf [[not small, as you tried to argue) before opting out of the old, ugly brickbox

The Bloomingdales in SoHo you mentioned? "The store, which opened in April of last year at 504 Broadway, marked a departure for the chain, both in layout and merchandise. Unlike the other Bloomingdale’s stores across the country, the SoHo unit is small [[only 80,000 square feet of selling space)." Link.

The Bloomingdales in Santa Monica? "Bloomingdale's is testing out a newer concept. Instead of massive department stores, the brand is building smaller stores. The next one is planned for Santa Monica, California." Link


As the NY Times says in its discussion of the new Nordstroms:"New department stores have become a rarity, especially with the growth of online shopping. And New York’s retail cemetery is filled with those that have expired: Gimbels, Bonwit Teller, S. Klein, Hearn’s, Saks-34th Street, B. Altman, Sterns, Alexanders, Orbach’s and Abraham & Straus."

Department stores that are trying to service this growing urban population are going to need to adapt, just like the other big box stores are doing.

[DetroitPlanner]

The trend is for fewer large department stores mostly in suburban locations. If you take a snapshot of large department stores located in dense urban areas. You will see a sharp decrease in number at ten year intervals since 1960.

Here is the blog of a local guy who has chronicled the death of the american department store. It is a great read for those interested in the history of downtowns. http://departmentstoremuseum.blogspot.com/

The fact is that not only the number of departments stores are down, thereyare now only a few unique companies left. Many department stores operate under different names with slightly different markets [[Macys/Bloomingdales, Kmart/Sears). Those that are left have nowhere near the number of departments as they once had. When I was a kid you could buy appliances, fabrics, pet supplies, rare coins and stamps, and all sorts of things at Hudsons. Those departments are all long gone. Customer service is way down as well. The counters have been replaced with piles of clothes or stuff stacked on the walls. Check out some of the directories of the grand old stores on the link above if you don't believe me.

Regardless of all of this. The area that this thread originally began to discuss is on an upswing. That is a good thing in general. Lets hope that in the near future the development happens in a way that is not as heavilly subsidized as it has in the past. Lets start looking at other parts of the City that need help too. There is more to the City than this small area.

[marshamusic]

Here is the blog of a local guy who has chronicled the death of the american department store. It is a great read for those interested in the history of downtowns. http://departmentstoremuseum.blogspot.com/

Thanks! I can't wait to get some time to read this - looks like a great read for those interested in the history of SHOPPING.

[canuck]

Thanks Detroitplanner, a lot of good stuff in there.