  Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 2832 Registered: 04-2006 |
The LA Times ran a story today about the faltering residential market in downtown Los Angeles. http://www.latimes.com/news/la -fi-downtown13mar13,0,4111447. story Does L.A.'s story have any implications for downtown Detroit? My opinion is that there are some lessons to be learned about the pitfalls of making a market. On the other hand, the revival of downtown Detroit is much more essential to the stability of the metropolitan Detroit than downtown L.A. is for it's respective region. My concern right now is that the Detroit leaders might be putting a little too much emphasis on housing in and around downtown rather than building a business district. | ||
Miketoronto Member Username: Miketoronto Post Number: 802 Registered: 07-2004 |
You got that right. Same with all our downtowns that are only worried about residents, Toronto included. A downtown is not a downtown, if all you have are residents. A downtown is suppose to be the centre of the region, and must have business, culture, etc. I totally do agree that residential development is pushed far to much compared to business. People need places to work also  | ||
Gazhekwe Member Username: Gazhekwe Post Number: 1691 Registered: 08-2007 |
And shop, and play. Lots of nice entertainment centers, and it seems the walkin food places are coming along nicely. We need tailors, dry cleaners, barbers, beauticians, clothing shops, tchatchke shops. I remember an article from the 60s about what you could find downtown, birdseed candy was one of the things. I think you might still be able to find that in Greektown. (Message edited by gazhekwe on March 13, 2008) | ||
Izzadore Member Username: Izzadore Post Number: 115 Registered: 11-2006 |
Mike, People need places to work for sure but the idea that Downtown is this big epicenter of everything for a city needs to be revisited. The very people that need a place to work also need a place to live. And as cities become more congested those people want to work close to home, if not in their home... Pushing residential is not bad as long as it's medium or high density. Let's take Grand River and Greenfield (again, one of the many parts of Detroit that most everyone on this forum overlooks because it not Downtown). The buildings in that area could be demolished and medium density housing could replace it. YES - Bye Bye Kingsway! It would also spawn some new businesses. In fact anywhere there is decent medium density housing there are good paying jobs. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 2834 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote: But don't people needs jobs before they worry about a place to live? | ||
Detroitrise Member Username: Detroitrise Post Number: 1773 Registered: 09-2007 |
Well Oakland County is the epicenter for SE Michigan. Detroit is mostly a civic and sports entertainment epicenter for the region. We've been advertising businesses to locate downtown for years. Instead, we have the post office moving to Pontiac. (Message edited by Detroitrise on March 13, 2008) | ||
Izzadore Member Username: Izzadore Post Number: 116 Registered: 11-2006 |
quote: Don't people want to live near their job? Especially with $4 gas and no chance in H*LL of having mass transit in the next ten years (no matter how much everyone on this forum clicks their collective heels.) Chicken or Egg? | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 1571 Registered: 04-2006 |
Downtown will not be strong unless the neighborhoods are strong. Disinvestment in the neighborhoods is counterintuitive to all of the investment in the CBD. Business (in CBD) will not survive unless there is a market. By having wealth in the neighborhoods these businesses are supported. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 2836 Registered: 04-2006 |
^An economy/jobs (the egg) produce a real estate market (the chicken)... The real estate market that had been eroded and revitalized in places like Manhattan and (more recently) DC, did indeed come about because people wanted to be closer to their jobs. The catch was that the jobs were there first. (Message edited by iheartthed on March 13, 2008) | ||
Barnesfoto Member Username: Barnesfoto Post Number: 4848 Registered: 10-2003 |
Interesting article for me, as I live a few blocks from a number of new downtown LA Condo developments, many of them finished in the last month. My gut feeling has been "They are overbuilding and everything is overpriced". There are hundreds more units under construction, including a large number of VERY overpriced lofts. However,there are plenty of other developments going on in Downtown LA, including new restaurants/nightclubs /galleries, new office buildings, the restoration of a number of old theater buildings, and the expansion of the light rail/subway system. Downtown LA is a great place, it looks like it will be getting more affordable soon! | ||
Izzadore Member Username: Izzadore Post Number: 117 Registered: 11-2006 |
quote: Deee-troit-Plannner -- You've got it. | ||
Detroitmaybe Member Username: Detroitmaybe Post Number: 10 Registered: 03-2008 |
We need to re-evaluate Detroits Master Urban Plan, and the success or lack thereof. Something is terribly wrong...and DetroitPlanner you are right on!! | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 6465 Registered: 08-2004 |
I wouldn't compare downtown Detroit to Los Angeles. Detroit has a nice waterfront location, while downtown Los Angeles is located far away from a large water source. Downtown LA always suffered in the past as not being "downtown enough". Also, the congestion found in LA is horrendous. Our freeways during rush hour are like theirs during off hours. One thing I have never been able to understand is that in the last 20 years when a lot of cities have restored their old movie palaces, in downtown Los Angeles, they have not. There are 12 old palaces along Broadway in downtown LA, and they have remained unrestored until now (although for some reason all their downtown palaces are all on the smaller side, none being larger than Orchestra Hall). From an entertainment prospect, downtown LA suffers from the proximity to Hollywood, where there are old movie palaces (El Capitan, Grauman's Egyptian, Mann's Chinese, Pantages) that have been restored, and with the addition of the Kodak Theatre make Hollywood the entertainment capital of the entire region. In Detroit, there is no suburban threat to the entertainment capital... the Stadia/Theatre/Casino district. And in the area of housing... most folks here claim that housing is going too slow, that there's a pent up demand (or at least there was until the housing crunch). So being overbuilt is not a problem that Detroit has at the moment. Here most downtown housing has been historic rehab. | ||
Sean_of_detroit Member Username: Sean_of_detroit Post Number: 14 Registered: 03-2008 |
Izzadore, always the egg. Dinosaurs layed eggs way before there were any chickens. Yes, I agree that it's time for the city to be investing more into the neighberhoods. The idea was that the lofts and condos would attract young "hip" business people (cool cities). Heavy investment in the neighberhoods seems like it would be the logical next step. My Fiancee and I had our first date on Campus Martius. We met and ate at the Hard Rock Cafe, then got some ice cream from Ben and Jerry's and sat in the park. It was just one of those perfect moments. I think the people that want to live downtown, want to live their because they like an urban environment. Also, I have come across quiet a few people who commute to the suburbs from the Millender Center or Riverfront Towers. They seem to like the reversed commutes. | ||
Barnesfoto Member Username: Barnesfoto Post Number: 4851 Registered: 10-2003 |
for Gistok: http://www.angelenic.com/insid e-the-majestic-million-dollar- theatre/ http://www.latimes.com/news/lo cal/la-me-broadway28jan28,1,14 21189.story Downtown LA is PLENTY downtown enough and often serves as a stand in for NYC in movies...just sat at an outdoor cafe last weekend watching an apocalyptic NYC fire being battled by heroic NYC Fire Fighters, complete with faux smoke and explosions... Now if we could just get the rent back down to pre-2000 rates... As for bodies of water, I cross over the LA River every time I ride my bike into the 1/2 mile to downtown...It may only be twenty feet wide, but it's still a river. | ||
Baliad Member Username: Baliad Post Number: 84 Registered: 08-2005 |
for a long time downtown LA has not been the center of it all for Southern Cal... i don't think it has any implications for Detroit... | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 1315 Registered: 11-2003 |
Gistok-- I'm sure you know this (others may not), but Hollywood is a part of L.A...so L.A. actually IS the entertainment capital of that entire region. | ||
Izzadore Member Username: Izzadore Post Number: 118 Registered: 11-2006 |
quote: I like Sim City also... Again, the mindset that Downtown Detroit HAS to be some 'epicenter' for developments needs to be refined. The whole city can't be left out or you get what you got now. A few working class people (i.e.: investment) either commuting or living downtown that would never go to an area like Grand Land (where, by the way they'd be perfectly safe) or any Detroit neighborhood. Ever. Can Downtown Detroit be an 'epicenter'? Sure but not without investment in the city's neighborhoods. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 2840 Registered: 04-2006 |
^What the hell does any of that have to do with (re-) building a business district? | ||
Izzadore Member Username: Izzadore Post Number: 119 Registered: 11-2006 |
Stop viewing Downtown Detroit as a business district. View the City of Detroit as a business district. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 6468 Registered: 08-2004 |
Yes Hollywood is part of the over 750 square miles that make up the city of Los Angeles. Barnesfoto, since I'm not familiar with the distances, just how far is Hollywood from downtown. Is it farther than New Center is from downtown Detroit? Also, does the 20 ft. wide Los Angeles River always have water in it? Or is it just a glorified cement water channel like the San Gabriel River? I agree that downtown LA finally has high density tall buildings. But prior to circa 1970 downtown Los Angeles was pretty low rise, with the tallest building for decades being the famous LA City Hall. Thanks for the links Barnesfoto, it's nice to see that Los Angeles is starting to do something with their treasure trove of old downtown movie palaces. Oddly enough, it seems that LA is where Detroit was in the 1980's when it came to downtown movie palaces (not yet restored). Of the 12 Broadway movie palaces, many are still closed or used for another function. The Pantages is a jewelry store, the Tower has been closed, the United Artists is a Jehovah's Witness Church, and many of the others are either closed or used for Spanish language movies. The jewel of the downtown theatres has been the Los Angeles Theatre, a 2,200 Baroque gem, that has been closed since the 1990's. Ironically none of the downtown LA theatres are very large movie palaces. The largest only has 2,450 seats, which is way shy of even Detroit's midsized State Theatre, which had about 3,000 seats. The one thing that LA had in its' favor is the weather. The freeze/thaw cycle common to Detroit winters has played havoc on our remaining unrestored movie palaces, while the LA palaces never had to worry about bursting pipes from the winter cold ruining the plasterwork. Here is a picture of the Los Angeles 2,200 seat United Artists Theatre (it is Detroit architect C. Howard Crane's only LA movie palace). It is similar in size to the Detroit United Artists. In LA, the UA Theatre is considered large... while in downtown Detroit, the similar sized UA Theatre is considered small. Go figure!   | ||
Miketoronto Member Username: Miketoronto Post Number: 805 Registered: 07-2004 |
Investment in the neighbourhoods is not going to happen untill a critical mass has been remade in downtown Detroit. I do not think the neighbourhoods are being ignored at all. Detroit is just not at the point yet, where the neighbourhoods need to be restored. As downtown and the Woodward corridor continue to grow and hit that critical mass, then you will see spill over into the neighbourhoods. But without a strong downtown, you can forget about strong neighbourhoods. Philly has put alot of effort into their downtown. Now that the downtown is back, they actually have adds targeted at downtwon dwellers who are having kids, to consider the inner city neighbourhoods, instead of fleeing to the burbs. You gotta start with the heart first And a downtown needs more then residents. When I was on my Theatre Tour of Detroit last summer, the older gentleman I was talking with said something interesting. He said how back in downtown Detroit's heyday, hardly anyone lived downtown. Downtown was busy, because it had all the activities a city is suppose to have, that attracts people. Downtown dwellers yes are important, and they have been the cornerstone of downtown policy in some cities for 30 years. But at the same time, residents are sometimes seen as the fix to downtown problems. But they are not. Having residents is not going to bring back the downtown that was there before. because the downtown of before was a real attraction. And if you want to it bloom into a real downtown again, then it has to attract people who not only live in the downtown condos, but people from a metro wide base. And that means having business, and other things downtown like entertainment, shopping, universities, etc. That is why I believe some of those old towers in Detroit should be preserved for office space. You are losing some of the most central locations in the CBD to condos. I like this quote from the Toronto Official Plan. This could apply to Detroit to. "Downtown: It is the place where our history was born, and where much of our future will be shaped" (Message edited by miketoronto on March 13, 2008) | ||
Ladyinabag Member Username: Ladyinabag Post Number: 452 Registered: 03-2007 |
It has been lately. | ||
Detroitrise Member Username: Detroitrise Post Number: 1774 Registered: 09-2007 |
This thread is a Catch-22. You need investors in order to buildup your downtown yet you need a built up downtown to lure investors. Go figure... (Message edited by detroitrise on March 13, 2008) | ||
Onthe405 Member Username: Onthe405 Post Number: 39 Registered: 11-2007 |
"Also, does the 20 ft. wide Los Angeles River always have water in it? Or is it just a glorified cement water channel like the San Gabriel River?" "I wouldn't compare downtown Detroit to Los Angeles. Detroit has a nice waterfront location, while downtown Los Angeles is located far away from a large water source" The presumption of these statements are that aesthetic geographic beauty is limited exclusively to proximity to a body of water. This applies to areas like SE Michigan where the landscape is comparatively flat. Lakes & rivers provide the only major variation in terrain. While the dig is true that the LA river (as it flows through downtown) is essentially an oversized storm drain, the CBD encompasses several hills, which provide for less-known treasures like the Angel’s Flight funicular and the 1500 waterfall-lined steps up Bunker Hill to the US Bank (nee Library) Tower. Downtown LA is situated nearly in the center of a basin. Consequently (even with the infamous smog) virtually every high-rise provides some type of spectacular view in all four directions: the Hollywood Hills, the San Gabriel Mountains (snow-capped in winter), the Long Beach skyline/Palos Verdes Peninsula, or the Pacific Ocean. The setting is similar in Salt Lake City. The Great Salt Lake is nearby, but the CBD doesn’t front it. The mountain views surrounding downtown are quite magnificent. As is usually the case, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 1573 Registered: 04-2006 |
Mike Toronto Try driving down W Warren, Fenkell, or Mack Avenue and tell me that the neighborhoods are not being ignored. | ||
Detroitrise Member Username: Detroitrise Post Number: 1775 Registered: 09-2007 |
"Try driving down W Warren, Fenkell, or Mack Avenue and tell me that the neighborhoods are not being ignored." Mack has actually come a long way from 10 years ago. I do agree however, the neighborhoods are definitely getting ignored. Whoever thinks you should start with the center and work out is whacko. The CBD and neighborhood must get worked on together. | ||
Miketoronto Member Username: Miketoronto Post Number: 807 Registered: 07-2004 |
Unless you have a strong center, who is going to want to live in the neighbourhoods? Both need to be strong, but without a strong center, people are not just going to flock to the inner city neighbourhoods. Plus the mayor has announced a plan to stablize neighbourhood districts. But if people are having to commute out to like 25 Mile Road for work. They are not going to think of locating in a city neighbourhood. Economic activity must be brought back to the city. Central Detroit is already growing in population. The neighbourhoods will grow once the growth spills over from the central area. | ||
Ray Member Username: Ray Post Number: 1098 Registered: 06-2004 |
The way it works is you have a great downtown, then affluent single people want to live their or in the immediately adjacent lower priced neighborhoods. Then as it grows, the yuppie steam roller drives outward, gentrifying block by block until you have a solid urban core. There nothing in this equation for poor people and never has been. Sexy cities like Chicago, SF and NY are all about people who have money. I think there's s divergence on this forum between the people (mainly white yuppies) who want Detroit to be a sexy city because they love cities (this is my category), and people who are focused on the social problems of Detroit, I guess because they have an acute sense of social justice. The former group wants to remove the existing poor population and replace them with affluent (or at least tax paying) knowledge worker types; the later wants to somehow improve the lot of the people who are already in Detroit so they will have a nice, working class place to live and raise their families. Two diametrically opposing visions for the city. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 6472 Registered: 08-2004 |
Onthe405, I wasn't trying to slam Los Angeles because of it being far from a water source. Detroit looks most spectacular from across the river from Windsor, while I think downtown LA is at its' most beautiful from the slopes of Griffith Park. As for the San Gabriel Mountains, yes they are spectacular... but like Munich and the Alps... they are most spectacular on the days that the mountains can actually be seen. That funicular in downtown LA is spectacular, the colorful stations are drop dead gorgeous! If I ever win big in a lottery, I would have a winter vacation home on the ocean side of the Palos Verdes Peninsula, high up along the mountainside (not too far from San Pedro) overlooking the Catalina Islands. |
