  Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1937 Registered: 06-2006 |
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.d ll/article?AID=/20070827/BIZ/7 08270393 | ||
Jfried Member Username: Jfried Post Number: 1043 Registered: 11-2003 |
And this trend will last for a while. It will be years before retail catches up in the developing suburbs, in addition to the recent realization by many retailers that there is strong buying power in the traditionally overlooked urban areas. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9868 Registered: 10-2003 |
How cannibalistic will these developments be for existing retailers. They very well may do great business but I don't see any additional buying power coming to SE Michigan. New retail development will come at a cost of existing retail. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1938 Registered: 06-2006 |
Here's the website and rendering for The Mall at Partridge Creek that is set to open this October  | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 3089 Registered: 10-2003 |
Oh good! Where there was once frontier, there will now be a contrived frontier shopping experience. Let's head over to Ye Olde Crate & Barrel.... I'm with Jt1--there is no way that all this new "growth" is sustainable. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1939 Registered: 06-2006 |
Well, in the article it said that retailers expect small margins in the near term, but are expecting the region's economy to rebound by the end of the decade...so while the current economy may not appear to be able to sustain all this new retail, retailers are betting that the economy is 5 years will, and they want to be there at the beginning... Also, this current recession we're seeing is hitting blue collar workers a lot harder than white collar workers...there's still a ton on money being made in SE Michigan...that's not to say that there isn't any spillover from auto layoffs and such...but as the article said, the region is still ranked very high in terms of personal income... | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 3090 Registered: 10-2003 |
Thejesus, I understand all of that. But how many stores and malls can one person possibly shop at? Every new customer at Partridge Creek is a former customer from somewhere else. The population of Southeast Michigan has been static for 35 years--this is just diluting a finite market. | ||
Kgrimmwsu Member Username: Kgrimmwsu Post Number: 99 Registered: 06-2004 |
The seven county region considered southeast Michigan has actually grown by 67,359 people since 2000, but it is still very slow growth. Courtesy of SEMCOG http://www.semcog.org/Products /pdfs/Population%20and%20House holds%20in%20Southeast%20Michi gan%202006.pdf | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1941 Registered: 06-2006 |
True, there will probably be a few places that get eaten up by the new retail, but that's just creative destruction...also, creating a new, pleasant shopping experience can motivate people to spend more money or do more shopping in-person than online... Either way, if the economy rebounds in a few years like many expect, the new retail will be completely justified...if not, we'll be no worse off than before | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 1326 Registered: 07-2004 |
What if the economy continues to decline? | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 3091 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: People in Detroit have been saying that for 60 years. You don't think Hudsons said the exact same thing when they built Northland in the 50s? How many times does Detroit have to beat its head on the wall? This is the same phenomenon that effectively killed off retail in downtown Detroit. Get with the program. THE SPRAWL ISN'T HEALTHY. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1943 Registered: 06-2006 |
^um, then some retailers will be out of business, probably some old and some new... there's a degree of risk with any investment, which is why investors rely on the forecasting of experts, who in this case are predicting a rebounding economy in SE Michigan by the end of the decade... Honestly, I'm a lot more worried about all the housing that continues to be built while home values are plummeting | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9869 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Outside of the fact that we will be left with more empty buildings, empty parking lots, etc. | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 1327 Registered: 07-2004 |
That's OK, Jt1. We'll just move on to the next belt of farmland. Then we'll see the retail REALLY boom. We can use county, state and federal resources to drive that expansion too. Meanwhile, let the inner rings and city deal with concrete, roads, runoff, decaying infrastructure, etc. If they can't pay for it, that's their problem. What do they think, government is a charity? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1944 Registered: 06-2006 |
Well, all I can say is let the investors and the communities these places are being built in worry about the risk...if it doesn't work out, though from them... I was hoping this thread would be more positive and focus more on the forecasts about the economy rebounding by the end of the decade...but it seems people are so offended by economic development in the suburbs that you guys don't seem care much about the positive signs... I'll leave you all to wallow in your anti-suburban rhetoric | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 1328 Registered: 07-2004 |
Couldn't it be possible that the dailies are trying to blow just a wee bit of smoke up your butt, Thejesus, and you're a bit overeager to let them? Naw, that's crazy. People in the dailies are totally independent, not fearful scribes trying to appease their corporate paymasters. Ludicrous.  | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 3092 Registered: 10-2003 |
^^^It's not development. It's displacement. Talking about "growth" in an already oversaturated retail market with a static population is just preposterous. I'm just curious to know who the next Wonderland is going to be. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9870 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: I don't perceive the comments as anti-suburb since these will hurt other suburb retail locations, not Detroit. It is just a matter of hoping for smart growth not recreating what is already out there in SE Michigan. How you get anti-suburb from this isn't too clear to me. The places that will lose are other suburbs. | ||
Jfried Member Username: Jfried Post Number: 1046 Registered: 11-2003 |
In reality, this is infill development. This development could just have easily jumped up to Macomb's new growth corridor along 26 Mile Road. Honestly, this side of town has been been underserved by "luxury" shopping for years. I'm pretty disgusted by the characters of the development in this area, but the truth is that there has been a lot of money there for a long time and these people will easily support this level of retail. Look at the list of retailers, not many of them have locations in Macomb County, or within 20 miles of this development. The ones that may relocate from Lakeside Mall actually are causing that mall to up their game and invest heavily in keeping, and expanding their own customer base. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 3093 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: If this is infill, what was the site previously? If there weren't a slew of unnecessary McMansions out there, that area wouldn't be under-retailed. quote: In a finite population, there are finite resources. Again--see Northland, 1950s. It's a ZERO SUM GAME. | ||
Wazootyman Member Username: Wazootyman Post Number: 248 Registered: 02-2006 |
Old malls die, new malls replace them, shopping trends change. Nordstrom is not tripling its presence in SE Michigan as an experiment. I would highly doubt they'd build two new stores unless they were absolutely certain they would be profitable. There are plenty of high-growth areas of the country they could expend resources into - but it turns out they see an expanding market in SE Michigan. Danindc - please do your research before arguing. Look at a map, and see where Partridge Creek is being built: http://maps.google.com/maps?f= q&hl=en&geocode=&q=17420+Hall+ Road,+Clinton+Township,+MI&sll =37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=37.32 5633,72.773438&ie=UTF8&ll=42.6 26389,-82.944991&spn=0.003537, 0.008422&t=h&z=18&om=1 Unless they are building over the golf course - which I suspect they are not - they are building on what looks like a vacant field. The area is already completely surrounded by development, which means that this is infill. It is not on the edge of development, and is not necessarily contributing to sprawl. The "McMansions" exist because people want to live in them. If they wanted to live in a box in an urban setting, they would. It's a freedom of choice, and I suppose the majority has spoken. | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 1329 Registered: 07-2004 |
Haha. Building on a vacant field in now called "in-fill". Hoo-boy. That's not the connotation I got from it up to now. | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 1546 Registered: 10-2006 |
"the construction of 17 Wal-Mart supercenters" I'm feeling sorry for metro D. | ||
Jfried Member Username: Jfried Post Number: 1047 Registered: 11-2003 |
------------------------------ If this is infill, what was the site previously? ------------------------------ --------------- A golf course. Not exactly undeveloped prairie. However, a great majority of the site is in a flood plain & will remain openspace. The township has actually opposed retail development on m.59 for years. The area was zoned office/research technology. As development has intensified coming from the west, the township has been on the losing end of several lawsuits basically forcing them to allow this type of development. They're currently fighting a wallmart across the street. ------------------------------ -- If there weren't a slew of unnecessary McMansions out there, that area wouldn't be under-retailed. ------------------------------ ------------- This may be true, but now that the past leadership allowed that type of residential it's not very practical to exclude services for the current residents. Does it make sense for all these residents to drive 20 miles everytime they want a luxury good? ------------------------------ ---- In a finite population, there are finite resources. Again--see Northland, 1950s. It's a ZERO SUM GAME. ------------------------------ --------------- not exactly. many of these people currently spend a lot of their disposable income online. In addition, despite the regions slow growing economy, the number of higher income families continue to grow. There is a lot of money to be spent here. You can point out cases like Northland, but on the other hand there are examples like Macomb Mall where they have adapted to a new market and have some of the best occupancy rates and lease rates vs. carrying costs that rival any commercial development in the country. Management and adaptation have a lot to do with it. Dan, you can continue to bash as if this is only a Detroit problem, but too many of us know that's not the case. Most of these retailers have perfected the science they use in their site location analysis and this is replicated across the country. Is it the most sustainable development? In some cases no, but in general these are business men following what the market is demanding. | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 1330 Registered: 07-2004 |
Jfried: I believe you when you say there are complexities to be considered, but I believe I am entitled to my bitter laughter. For years, "in-fill" suggested that developers were reclaiming precious urban lots by building smart, usually higher-density housing that fit the urban footprint. That is where the term earned its favorable connotation with me. That it would be used to describe a large retail project being sited on a huge field in the exurbs seems at once absurd and disappointing. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 3094 Registered: 10-2003 |
I never said it was a Detroit-only problem. It's just that Detroit perfected this destructive art, and continues to suffer the most from such short-sighted development. But hey--it's the "free market". So we'll let the corporate whores and shills dance in the streets over these exciting new malls. I just don't see how continuing the same trends that got Michigan to this point is going to make the region more competitive. Here's a hint: nobody moves a home or business to a location because of the great shopping malls. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1468 Registered: 04-2006 |
Michigan just needs to let Ontario have Detroit. | ||
Fareastsider Member Username: Fareastsider Post Number: 561 Registered: 08-2006 |
I hate the term for "boom" for development. There is a lot of retail development in Chesterfield. Walmart expanded at HAll/94. They even built about 300 parking spaces extra away from the store. It is a large lot on the other side of the street in the development!! ( could someone explain again the legal need for all that useless parking.) The Meijer at 23/gratiot is expanding. There is a place called Waterside MArketplace with a Best Buy, Bed Bath and Beyond, and the typical cookie cutter stores. Meijer also opened another store at 26/94 in what was and is still a very undeveloped area. I sure like all of these unique developments Im sure it will make the area a unique destination in SE Michigan! God forbid you dont have a car trying to get to any of them. Has anyone been on 23Mile with the new light and double turn lane into the new development. It is the worst road design I have ever seen. The developers should have had to build a small section into a boulevard which would have been more safe. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 5200 Registered: 08-2004 |
Danindc, when you say "how many times does Detroit have to hit its' head against the wall, how does that differ from countless towns and cities across America that have seen their downtown retail decline at the expense of suburban shopping malls and strip malls? You make it sound like this phenomenon is a "Detroit only" thing, when it really isn't. It's more like the "rule", rather than the "exception". Only in Detroit, it has been compounded by fear of going into the city. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 3096 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: It's most pronounced in Detroit. For a region with the size and wealth of Detroit, there are a ridiculously low number of retail outlets in the city proper. This goes hand-in-hand with the income and racial disparities, of which we're all too aware. I'm not trying to bash Detroit, nor am I trying to say that this doesn't happen anywhere else. I AM saying that this isn't economically healthy or sustainable, and Detroit, of all places, is probably the most poorly equipped region to handle further repercussions from endless sprawl. |
