Detroit Still Tearing Down Usable Historic Buildings for Parking Lots/ W. Vernor

[Hermod]

Does Downtown Rochester deliberately create gaps in that historic streetscape for parking?

At one time in Rochester, there was a local department store called Mitzelfields. In the 1960s, Bill Mitzelfield noted that a lack of off-street parking was a drag on his business. He looked across the alley behind his business and bought up all of the old houses on the street behind his store, tore them down, and built a parking lot. Other businesses followed suit. If you go to Rochester, you will find massive amounts of parking just east of Main Street.

[animatedmartian]

says Bham: "If parking were not a prerequisite for retail vitaility, then why is there no such example anywhere in the tri-county area?" Mis-stating the issue, of course.

Are you blind? Grosse Pointe does not put holes in the streetscape on Mack for parking lots. You have to pay to park behind the street in a parking structure.

Does Downtown Rochester deliberately create gaps in that historic streetscape for parking?

What about Ann Arbor? Does AA allow building owners to buy up perfectly good buildings next door in Kerrytown to demolish for parking?

How about Royal Oak?

Actually yes to all of these. The parking lots in Royal Oak, Grosse Pointe, and Rochester used to be occupied with buildings. Especially the parking lots behind the main street streetwall. It's also the same reason why in Downtown Detroit as well as Downtown Ann Arbor, buildings are demolished for huge parking garages.

Parking is a prerequisite for development, period. Not just retail. And whether it takes the form of a lot or garage just depends on whether the area is expecting growth.

People use cars and cars take up space. If people aren't using cars, then there's no need for parking. Population decline just makes it a little bit easier if the buildings are unoccupied, but actually, population growth means a higher demand for parking and eventually you have to put it somewhere. There's no where in Metro Detroit where whole buildings and blocks haven't been demolished for parking.

Here's a perfect example of Dearborn demolishing whole blocks for their strips of retail. Those blocks of retail would not be able to survive if there was not any parking.

Attachment 23860

Attachment 23859

[313WX]

What should the city do with all of the abandoned properties? Nitpick about suburban-style improvements? At the end of the day, it's not up to the city to save its urban form, but us. We need to move in the houses. We need to buy the commercial buildings and open businesses. Without enough people and demand, the city's hands are tied.[/COLOR]

Funny thing is, people would also be whining if the structure continued sitting around until it became some burnt out hulk, because of the increased risk of a fire or the building being used as a crime den.

If there's no demand or desire to save the structure, then it will fall into disrepair and eventually require demolition, like so many other historic buildings in Detroit.

[wolverine]

What should the city do with all of the abandoned properties? Nitpick about suburban-style improvements? At the end of the day, it's not up to the city to save its urban form, but us. [/COLOR]

Yes, cities have building and zoning codes. Bulk regulations that can permit or prohibit certain types of development. They can also have overlay districts to regulate the character of properties as well as their appurtenances

Cities DO nitpick. Properties go through comprehensive reviews everyday. Cities modify zoning ordinances to meet changing needs while maintaining character, safe and clean environments. If Detroit is going to accept this type of development....well that's tragic.

[Junjie]

...

Here's a perfect example of Dearborn demolishing whole blocks for their strips of retail. Those blocks of retail would not be able to survive if there was not any parking.

Can you be more specific about your claim that parking is necessary for development? Otherwise, how did the retail strip in picture A come into existence prior to the parking being constructed in picture B?

[wolverine]

More than likely there was no actual demand for that surface parking in Dearborn like he states. Sure....maybe there's a prerequisite for convenient parking, but not necessarily quantity of spaces. The retail strip was historically functional without the lots and many people probably still drove to shopping in busier days.

I passed through that area a year ago and retail buildings facing the street were struggling despite the complimentary lot. Key word "complimentary" Because I believe they are incidental to the parking lot and strip retail that was built later.

[animatedmartian]

Can you be more specific about your claim that parking is necessary for development? Otherwise, how did the retail strip in picture A come into existence prior to the parking being constructed in picture B?

Mass transit. There used a time when less of the population used cars to get around. Not as much need for parking because not as many cars were on the road. People could still access the business by walking from the nearest streetcar station which usually was at the intersection of the main streets even when the streets were full to capacity of parked cars.

Modern day Detroit is completely different where +90% of the metro population travels by car, meaning more people are going to arrive some place by car.

Have you ever seen how many people show up to a Tiger's game by car? Imagine if there were no parking lots or parking garages around it and how many streets would be filled with parked cars along the side and how far people would have to park and then walk to the stadium. Then multiply that for every store and business that has any number of people arriving by car throughout the day or any apartments where 100s of people live in a single building and each person has a car. Where do you expect all those cars to go?!

[Junjie]

Mass transit. There used a time when less of the population used cars to get around. Not as much need for parking because not as many cars were on the road. People could still access the business by walking from the nearest streetcar station which usually was at the intersection of the main streets even when the streets were full to capacity of parked cars.

Modern day Detroit is completely different where +90% of the metro population travels by car, meaning more people are going to arrive some place by car.

Have you ever seen how many people show up to a Tiger's game by car? Imagine if there were no parking lots or parking garages around it and how many streets would be filled with parked cars along the side and how far people would have to park and then walk to the stadium. Then multiply that for every store and business that has any number of people arriving by car throughout the day or any apartments where 100s of people live in a single building and each person has a car. Where do you expect all those cars to go?!

Right, if the assumption is that everyone needs to drive their own car, then we need to tear down lots of the places they were originally supposed to shop/live/work in order to build parking for the remaining buildings. This is obviously the case in present-day Detroit but wasn't always. We're on the same page, I just wasn't sure how far you were taking the parking point.

This link seems relevant. Alternative to the above dilemma - cars take up lots of space, but successful and busy places require lots of people - exist.

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/23318/as-arlington-booms-traffic-drops/

[animatedmartian]

Right, if the assumption is that everyone needs to drive their own car, then we need to tear down lots of the places they were originally supposed to shop/live/work in order to build parking for the remaining buildings. This is obviously the case in present-day Detroit but wasn't always. We're on the same page, I just wasn't sure how far you were taking the parking point.

This link seems relevant. Alternative to the above dilemma - cars take up lots of space, but successful and busy places require lots of people - exist.

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/23318/as-arlington-booms-traffic-drops/

Ah yes, well transit costs money. Considerably more than it does to tear down a building a put a parking lot or garage. You don't have to look far to find out how people feel about paying for the construction of mass transit around here.

[Danny]

Absolutely. The U.S. Census has this data, and the NY Times has a handy map to look at racial changes over time, by race.

Take a look at the SW Detroit Census tracts closest to "original Mexicantown" [[Bagley area), and then along Vernor. You'll see Hispanic population decline in all these tracts.

Then take a look at the fringe neighborhoods Detroit, right near the city line [[Springwells). You'll see Hispanic population growth in all these tracts.

Finally take a look at Hispanic growth in the downriver suburbs. You'll see an explosion of Hispanic population.

http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/map

Yes, In a matter of fact new Hispanic owned shops are popping up like mushrooms along Fort St. from Outer Drive to Goodard St. La Sultana Panaderia Y Neveria is very popular Mexican Owned Ice Cream shop on Fort St near Southfield Rd. They get tons of customers every afternoon. They will suck Dairy Queen out of its location spot in couple years.

Lincoln Park has seen a gain of Hispanics in the last two years up to 15 percent. Melvindale has 18 percent and Ecorse has 15 percent. The demolition of Oakwood Heights and the next generation of Hispanics want better housing and living conditions. Moving to Downriver areas or further northward to Detroit West and Northwest side to set to their shops will their next solution. The Hispanic community will grow, but not in an alarming rate.

[Bham1982]

Cities DO nitpick. Properties go through comprehensive reviews everyday. Cities modify zoning ordinances to meet changing needs while maintaining character, safe and clean environments. If Detroit is going to accept this type of development....well that's tragic.

Nothing gets built in 99% of the U.S. without accessory parking. This is true even in the most urban of cities, excepting NYC and small areas of a couple of downtowns here and there.

I don't see what's so "tragic" about the scenario. Americans drive cars, and businesses want customers. In a perfect world everyone could walk to everything, I guess.

And re "cities do nitpick", that's, in part, why our cities have such poor built environments. The great urban neighborhoods of the U.S. are all built pre-zoning code. Zoning is just a tool for interest groups to control the built environment, generally to the detriment of others.

[Bham1982]

Can you be more specific about your claim that parking is necessary for development? Otherwise, how did the retail strip in picture A come into existence prior to the parking being constructed in picture B?

Beacuse that retail strip was built more than 100 years ago, prior to the explosion of automobile ownership. Obviously no one built for cars when there were no cars.

[nain rouge]

Cities DO nitpick. Properties go through comprehensive reviews everyday. Cities modify zoning ordinances to meet changing needs while maintaining character, safe and clean environments. If Detroit is going to accept this type of development....well that's tragic.

Yes, but how you expect a city with Detroit's population loss to aggressively maintain its urban form is beyond me. From just 2000 to 2010, most neighborhoods along Vernor experienced over a 10% population drop. Only the stretch near Grand Boulevard and traditional Mexicantown gained people, strangely enough.

As the population and density of the area continues to drop, it's only natural for the commercial density to drop, too. Less density in the immediate area also means that - yes - the customer bases of remaining businesses will tend to be farther flung, necessitating more parking. Believe it or not, the spots on Vernor in front of the popular establishments tend to fill up.

Parking for Duly's and Colombo's gets packed some nights, for example. And though you or I know we can just drive around the corner or drive down a block or two, you can bet that there are customers "complaining". That's America for you.

Like I said, the only way for Detroit to save "its" urban form is for all of us to move in, post haste. People shape the city, really, not the government.

[wolverine]

Yes, but how you expect a city with Detroit's population loss to aggressively maintain its urban form is beyond me. From just 2000 to 2010, most neighborhoods along Vernor experienced over a 10% population drop. Only the stretch near Grand Boulevard and traditional Mexicantown gained people, strangely enough.

.

I guess I don't have an answer other than either way, Detroit will lose

[wolverine]

Nothing gets built in 99% of the U.S. without accessory parking. This is true even in the most urban of cities, excepting NYC and small areas of a couple of downtowns here and there.

I don't see what's so "tragic" about the scenario. Americans drive cars, and businesses want customers. In a perfect world everyone could walk to everything, I guess.

And re "cities do nitpick", that's, in part, why our cities have such poor built environments. The great urban neighborhoods of the U.S. are all built pre-zoning code. Zoning is just a tool for interest groups to control the built environment, generally to the detriment of others.

Bham1982, I agree that zoning is part of the problem when it comes to sprawling cities, but most urban areas have successfully maintained traditional urban composure. It was more restrictive zoning in urban areas that allowed strip malls to starting popping up along older commercial avenues....True. Lesson learned: it didn't make those areas any better if they were in decline. Parking alone won't save cities, but decimating blocks of buildings doesn't necessarily help Detroit, and it definitely wouldn't help most other large American cities.

[rb336]

Quite early this morning I witnessed a crew dismantling a building on the north side of West Vernor Hwy. just across the street from Holy Redeemer. The block was intact until that moment. The building was brick and restorable.

What are they thinking???

Which building are you talking about, exactly?

If they are tearing it down for a parking lot, they need to get a variance for a curb cut passed

[nain rouge]

I guess I don't have an answer other than either way, Detroit will lose

It can win if you move there.

[Trumpeteer]

Exactly. It's called shrinking pains.

Detroit's turning into Atlanta before our very eyes...

I hope not!!

[313WX]

I hope not!!

*Unchecked suburban sprawl: Check!!!

*Car and highway-centric transportation system: Check!!!

*Rapid de-urbanization of large swaths of Detroit proper with downtown/midtown potentially being the only areas that are poised for growth: Check!!!

We just need the highly diversified economy and large numbers of educated people per-capita Atlanta has...

[DetroitPlanner]

Which building are you talking about, exactly?

If they are tearing it down for a parking lot, they need to get a variance for a curb cut passed

Not if you can access the parking from the existing alley. That is most likely the preferred way as it keeps spots on the street for the hungry merchant who will not have to maintain them.

[preserve]

After Kresge closed up, the building became an eyesore along that stretch of Vernor. It was just junk. Parking has been a problem along there as long as I can remember and I can go back 40-50 years. When the shoe store was a funeral parlor and the insurance office was a Cunningham's, it was nearly impossible to find a spot to park. The area around there is still inhabited, it is still a viable neighborhood and yes people do drive cars.

[rb336]

*Unchecked suburban sprawl: Check!!!

*Car and highway-centric transportation system: Check!!!

*Rapid de-urbanization of large swaths of Detroit proper with downtown/midtown potentially being the only areas that are poised for growth: Check!!!

We just need the highly diversified economy and large numbers of educated people per-capita Atlanta has...

Define "Atlanta"

[313WX]

Define "Atlanta"

Define what exactly about Atlanta?

[SWMAP]

After Kresge closed up, the building became an eyesore along that stretch of Vernor. It was just junk. Parking has been a problem along there as long as I can remember and I can go back 40-50 years. When the shoe store was a funeral parlor and the insurance office was a Cunningham's, it was nearly impossible to find a spot to park. The area around there is still inhabited, it is still a viable neighborhood and yes people do drive cars.

So, is it your opinion that some buildings on West Vernor forming an historic "curtain wall" to the street such as many other cities are trying to obtain, scruffy as they may currently be - should be torn down for parking lots?

[Islandman]

Define what exactly about Atlanta?

He's agreeing with you.