New Downtown vs. Old Downtown Detroit

[Luke09]

Ross has built two sizable projects in Metro Detroit. [[disclaimer- If you're a downtown booster, probably should stop reading now).

Ross' firm built the Palladium complex in downtown Birmingham, and the AMC Star 20 complex in Southfield.

Ah wasn't aware of those investments. Thanks. Birmingham is a better location for smart money, DT Det comes with more risk

[Luke09]

Ross stated at the Detroit Homecoming two years ago that he will not be significantly involved in the Detroit development scene.

Yep I recall that comment. I took that to mean that Related won't become another Bedrock or Platform, but he has made investments into the latter. So, I still have hope that The Related will step up with their own project one day. I'm sure he's monitoring, but who knows for sure if anything will come from them in Detroit, especially with large projects currently going on in NYC, LA and Chicago. Good news is that allocators still have an appetite for urban RE projects.

[Gistok]

I think saying NEVER is a very myopic view. It all depends on visionaries. Without Henry Ford, Detroit would never be the city it was by the mid 20th century. And yes it took just over 50 years to lose more than half its' population, but with visionaries [[there are some out there)... it could just as well be a major metropolis as easily as continue on a downward spiral.

Rome was the worlds largest city for 500 years with over a million residents... only to decline to as little as 25,000 inhabitants during the barbarian invasions, where it moldered at for a thousand year at that population until the Renaissance [[with larger cities in Italy such as Florence, Milan, Genoa, Naples and Palermo far ahead of it). And today it is once again the largest city in Italy with 2.7 million.

So to say NEVER is just a guess. Miss Cleo is dead, so there are no more Psychic's worth believing in.

It may not happen in our lifetime... but with the possibility of water levels rising if the earth is in a warm spell... then being surrounded by 20% of the worlds fresh water may help us as the outer coastal cities are underwater. It could be that simple... or it could be that the next Henry Ford comes along...

[SammyS]

Ah wasn't aware of those investments. Thanks. Birmingham is a better location for smart money, DT Det comes with more risk

Hardly. Birmingham has seen a fraction of the appreciation Downtown Detroit, and the inner ring, have seen over the last few years. Detroit was a risk back in 2011. Those that took the risk back then are now capitalizing.
Let's now project 5 to 10 years, which is relevant to the thread. What is likely to appreciate more, the suburbs or Detroit? Now ask yourself, are folks like Ross taking advantage of an opportunity right in front of them?

I should also note that Detroit offers opportunity to all income classes. Affordability exists within a few miles of the city center like no other city I can think of. Those still sitting on the fence should seriously consider making the move before they too get priced out. I'm speaking to the young folks here. Don't put yourself in a situation like those in other major cities and even abroad. They will forever be renters or worse still, serfs to landlords. Get on that escalator guys.

[iheartthed]

Downtown Detroit is already better than downtown L.A.

Detroit won't ever be New York. Few cities in the world compete with New York, and none of those cities are in the United States. New York has one of the most comprehensive rail transit networks in the world. Manhattan is also at the center of a 21 million person metropolis, and pretty seamlessly connects with the broader 50 million person Northeast Corridor.

Detroit is probably not ever going to catch Chicago, either. The city was on track to be a Chicago, but too much has been lost in Detroit over the past 50 years, while Chicago continued to develop its core.

After those first two, any big city is capable of occupying that third tier. In my opinion, the cities in it now are San Francisco, Boston, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, maybe Seattle [[I'm unfamiliar with Seattle). Detroit could reach this tier in a decade if the projects continue to materialize.

[313WX]

As long as Detroit lacks a halfway decent regional transit system, it will never be on the same level as Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco, DC, etc.

[Worldsgreatest]

^ Brooks is dying in about two months so we'll have better transit very very soon!

[Worldsgreatest]

Downtown Detroit is already better than downtown L.A.

Detroit won't ever be New York. Few cities in the world compete with New York, and none of those cities are in the United States. New York has one of the most comprehensive rail transit networks in the world. Manhattan is also at the center of a 21 million person metropolis, and pretty seamlessly connects with the broader 50 million person Northeast Corridor.

Detroit is probably not ever going to catch Chicago, either. The city was on track to be a Chicago, but too much has been lost in Detroit over the past 50 years, while Chicago continued to develop its core.

After those first two, any big city is capable of occupying that third tier. In my opinion, the cities in it now are San Francisco, Boston, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, maybe Seattle [[I'm unfamiliar with Seattle). Detroit could reach this tier in a decade if the projects continue to materialize.

Detroit could reach Chicago's current population in the next 60 years if climate change goes the way scientists think it will. Basically every coastal city now has a severe handicap/death sentence, all the cities in that tier you listed will struggle including NYC.

And I think it's worth noting while NYC has an extensive rail system it is crumbling, archaic and hasn't had any meaningful extensions since 1940. Forget competing with peer cities like London. NYC transit system can't even compete with supposedly "third world" cities in developing nations. It's real bad.

[iheartthed]

Detroit could reach Chicago's current population in the next 60 years if climate change goes the way scientists think it will. Basically every coastal city now has a severe handicap/death sentence, all the cities in that tier you listed will struggle including NYC.

And I think it's worth noting while NYC has an extensive rail system it is crumbling, archaic and hasn't had any meaningful extensions since 1940. Forget competing with peer cities like London. NYC transit system can't even compete with supposedly "third world" cities in developing nations. It's real bad.

The Second Avenue line opened two years ago.

The NYC subway is one of the biggest systems in the world, already. Most other systems are just playing catch up.

[Worldsgreatest]

The Second Avenue line opened two years ago. And it's still one of the biggest systems in the world, already. Most other systems are just playing catch up.

Uhh yeah. and that was a replacement for a line that existed a hundred years ago...

It literally took NYC a century just to replace a line they already had. that's how bad infrastructure is in NYC. Catch up? uhh I guess. I'm not an expert on other cities systems but I'd be willing to bet most Asian cities have far superior systems for their populations and London probably isn't far off. The trajectory is clear, NYC is falling behind in transit infrastructure.

[iheartthed]

Uhh yeah. and that was a replacement for a line that existed a hundred years ago...

It literally took NYC a century just to replace a line they already had. that's how bad infrastructure is in NYC. Catch up? uhh I guess. I'm not an expert on other cities systems but I'd be willing to bet most Asian cities have far superior systems for their populations and London probably isn't far off. The trajectory is clear, NYC is falling behind in transit infrastructure.

No, it did not. The Second Avenue line was a completely new subway line. The NYC subway is not much more than 100 years old.

[Worldsgreatest]

...the 2nd avenue line is a replacement of an elevated line that was already there and it took a hundred years to replace. NYC has had elevated lines since 1870.

the 2nd avenue line is NOT an expansion of transit and in no way contradicts what I said.

[iheartthed]

...the 2nd avenue line is a replacement of an elevated line that was already there and it took a hundred years to replace. NYC has had elevated lines since 1870.

the 2nd avenue line is NOT an expansion of transit and in no way contradicts what I said.

The Second Avenue El [[built in the 1870s) was not part of the NYC subway system. It predated the subway system, which first opened in 1904.

[archfan]

One of the things that will be different in new downtown vs '50s downtown will be the lack of secondary businesses. We might fill up the main retail spaces on Woodward, but we won't have the small shops and stands that were around in the '50s. I always notice those in photos from the era - men's hats, ladies' shoes, cameras, sporting goods, on and on. Every office building seemed to have a coffee shop, a shoeshine stand, a magazine stand and a cigarette/candy counter.

I doubt we'll see those again even if we have full retail infill back from Woodward. I don't think we shop that way anymore nor will those small shops make enough to support a family anymore. Which came first, I couldn't say.

[mwilbert]

One of the things that will be different in new downtown vs '50s downtown will be the lack of secondary businesses. We might fill up the main retail spaces on Woodward, but we won't have the small shops and stands that were around in the '50s. I always notice those in photos from the era - men's hats, ladies' shoes, cameras, sporting goods, on and on. Every office building seemed to have a coffee shop, a shoeshine stand, a magazine stand and a cigarette/candy counter..

All you have to do is look at what's in those kind of places in other US downtowns now [[other than NYC, which is unique) now. There's stuff in those spaces, but not shoeshine stands or magazine stands. A lot of food, a lot of personal services, a lot of niche shops.

[Towne Cluber]

Yep I recall that comment. I took that to mean that Related won't become another Bedrock or Platform, but he has made investments into the latter. So, I still have hope that The Related will step up with their own project one day. I'm sure he's monitoring, but who knows for sure if anything will come from them in Detroit, especially with large projects currently going on in NYC, LA and Chicago. Good news is that allocators still have an appetite for urban RE projects.

I wouldn’t read too much into Ross making a nominal investment in The Platform. After all, he is related to Peter Cummings. Ross has stated both publicly as well as privately that he “just doesn’t see it” when it comes to Detroit real estate development.

[313WX]

I'm not sure why people are being so hard on Ross.

The reality is, for developers who are looking for a quick/big ROI with minimal investment, Detroit doesn't have an extensive enough track record in terms of growth and success for real estate [[the "comeback," for all intents and purposes, is still in its infancy). Right now, you basically have one guy and his caravan of companies doing all of the heavy lifting [[without him, the city would revert back to the point of despair it was stuck in).

Once Detroit's "comeback" reaches the point where a number of non-Gilbert developers can claim success in Detroit's market, the city will then have established an *IT* factor and developers from all over will be tripping over themselves to get in on the action. And it will happen practically overnight [[when you least expect it) if other cities are any sign.

[EGrant]

Downtown Detroit isn't even close to downtown LA, which has made major strides in the past 10 years. Food, retail and office are all lightyears ahead of Detroit.

[Zads07]

I'd like to think the more time goes on, the more downtown Detroit will be a destination. But the area needs a regional transit system BADLY.

[mikeg19]

Detroit will never be NYC or Chicago. It just won't happen. LA and ATL, I don't know if they can touch LA with their high end shopping/retail either in the surrounding area. But why do we need to? We can have our own unique thing here and we don't need to confirm to "BE" NYC or Chicago. Just let this thing happen organically and see where we are at in 20 years.

But if we are speaking in terms of architecture or importance of architecture, I don't think LA or Atlanta is even close. Strictly speaking of downtown, neither of those cities has anything nearly as impressive as we do.

[Onthe405]

Downtown Detroit is already better than downtown L.A.

Downtown Detroit isn't even close to downtown LA, which has made major strides in the past 10 years. Food, retail and office are all light years ahead of Detroit.

Calling the pace of development, re-purposing, and value of real estate in DTLA over the past 10 years "breakneck" is an understatement. .. to the point where it's difficult to keep up with the latest. The most promising aspect is that the demand is driving the developments--not the other way around.

Typical news: Warner Music passed on West Hollywood & Santa Monica to locate in a refurbished Ford plant. .. .down the street from Virgin Hyperloop One.

https://www.latimes.com/business/la-...407-story.html

As for the supposed "lack of significant architecture"? Possibly a poor tour guide?

[Worldsgreatest]

^ the same thing has been happening in Detroit so DTLA is nothing special. Hudson tower will actually be the same height as that Wilshire tower that just got built minus the spire. LA has a lot of short stumpy old buildings as architecture goes. Not nearly as impressive as Detroit.

LA also does new development horribly. You will see nothing like brush park/city modern being built there. Instead DTLA builds absolutely massive fortress like parking garages under it's new towers and cheesy las vegas gimmicky sort of stuff. that is what I'd consider bad urbanism. DTLA remains the least desirable part of the LA area.

[iheartthed]

Downtown Detroit isn't even close to downtown LA, which has made major strides in the past 10 years. Food, retail and office are all lightyears ahead of Detroit.

DTLA has made strides, but it is hardly "lightyears" ahead of downtown Detroit. There are more office workers in downtown L.A., but that's about the extent of DTLA's excellence over Detroit. Some might point to the FigAt7th shopping mall, but it is not a high-end shopping experience. You have to travel well away from DTLA to do that. OTOH, while the selection is extremely sparse, Detroit has legit upper-end retail downtown.

It is actually pretty stunning that these two city centers are in the same league at all, considering that the L.A. region is so much more populous than Metro Detroit. That said, both are places that are obviously on the upswing, and DTLA does have the advantage of 1) better transit infrastructure, 2) being located in a much more populous city where space it at a premium, and 3) located in a much more affluent region. But right now I just don't see that DTLA is "lightyears" ahead of downtown Detroit... Or ahead of downtown Detroit at all.

[Cincinnati_Kid]

No. And that answer is in no way admitting inevitable failure. It's important for folks in our region to acknowledge that the days of "Detroit, the fifth largest city" are gone forever. We, along with the rest of the country, do not compete on the same level with New York. That city is on a different plane altogether. Nor do we compete with Chicago or Los Angeles. We don't even compete with Boston, San Francisco or Dallas. Our peer cities in the 21st century are places like Pittsburgh, Columbus, Indianapolis, Charlotte, Minneapolis, Nashville, etc. Of course, cities are more than their downtowns, but ours should indeed seek to provide commercial, residential, entertainment and tourist experiences to rival at least these peer cities. That goal is certainly attainable if our political and business leadership continue to make policy and land use decisions that build on the recent successes. And sadly, [[sorry to pile on the Ilitch family but) the District Detroit is looming larger by the day as a land use failure that will significantly diminish our city's comeback.

Nail on the head here.....

[Cincinnati_Kid]

^ Brooks is dying in about two months so we'll have better transit very very soon!

Damn, I'm not a LBP fan either, but what a heartless thing to say.....