  Mrjoshua Member Username: Mrjoshua Post Number: 943 Registered: 03-2005 |
 Christopher Leinberger, director of U-M's Graduate Real Estate Program, discusses the concept of "walkable urbanity" in Detroit on Wednesday. Developers aim to get Detroit on its feet Renovations, updates to downtown area spur real estate forum on the market for walkability. Louis Aguilar / The Detroit News DETROIT -- There are times when Christopher Leinberger has gone to community meetings with bodyguards because of his radical ideas about walking -- like suggesting neighborhood planning that encourages residents to walk up to six blocks to get to stores and entertainment. "I have an associate who regularly receives death threats" for suggesting the idea, said Leinberger, who is director of the University of Michigan's Graduate Real Estate Program. Many people don't want high-density housing and storefronts in their backyard, Leinberger said. "Thirty to 40 percent of us want to live in driveable places," he said. But another 30 percent to 40 percent are attracting to urban living where they rarely have to drive -- places like downtown Royal Oak, Birmingham and Ann Arbor. Academics like Leinberger and real estate developers interested in downtown Detroit say creating a similar walkable urban experience is crucial to city's growth. Many of those proponents will gather today and Friday at the 20th annual University of Michigan/Urban Land Institute Real Estate Forum at Cobo Center in Detroit. At the forum, Leinberger plans to present research showing that downtown Detroit is well on its way to becoming a place where people want to live, shop and dine out. And, he says, creating a walkable Detroit is crucial to the city's economic future, he said. The presentation will be part of an official strategy for a walkable downtown to be unveiled early next year by the Detroit Economic Growth Corp. and the Downtown Detroit Partnership. Impressive progress made The forum will highlight some of the catalysts of downtown Detroit's resurgence, such as the $180 million renovation of Book-Cadillac Hotel and the influx of 4,000 mostly young, educated and relatively affluent people to the downtown core since 2000. Leinberger is impressed with the recent progress. "You made all the right decisions," he said. "There is not a wrong decision I can see that this metropolitan area has made regarding downtown over the last five, six or seven years." "If so many of us want (walkable urbanity) and you don't offer it, from an economic point of view, you're out of luck," Leinberger said, as he took a quick walk downtown Tuesday evening. "Those people will move to Chicago or someplace else to find it." New Detroiters valuable And it's not a group -- educated, influential -- that a community wants to lose. Leinberger will tell forum participants that average household incomes of downtown Detroit is $59,300, which is 33 percent higher than a previous estimate based on 2000 census data. As a whole, 83 percent of new downtown residents have a college degree or better. And there is a larger population base than previously thought, his research shows. The study also shows that of visitors to Metro Detroit, 35 percent come for the casinos, 23 percent come for the nightlife, 22 percent for social and family events, and 20 percent for professional sports. The research notes that a large number of those activities are concentrated downtown, which itself draws 15 million visitors a year. "That makes downtown Detroit an urban entertainment district that appeals to adults. "That's a unique position," Leinberger said. In contrast, other cities have activities more attractive to families, such as sightseeing, shopping and dining. Further expansion ahead Attending this week's forum are the biggest developers in the nation, including Albert Ratner, co-chair of Forest City Enterprises; Sam Zell, president and chair of Equity Group Investments; and Stephen Ross, chief executive officer of The Related Cos. The University of Michigan's business school is named after Ross. All three have Michigan ties, Leinberger said. Other proposals include creating a business improvement district, in which properties are taxed for sidewalk and street cleaning, and roving ambassadors, such as those who greeted Super Bowl visitors. Leinberger envisions a downtown Detroit with a population five times it current size. "If you build out downtown, there'll be 50,000 to 70,000 people in this one square mile. Build out midtown, that's another 70,000 people," he said. You can reach Louis Aguilar at (313) 222-2760 or laguilar@detnews.com. | ||
Mind_field Member Username: Mind_field Post Number: 635 Registered: 10-2003 |
I suppose if Philly can have an ultra rich, burgeoning downtown with over 80,000 residents in the middle of a high crime, stigmatized city, then why can't Detroit do the same? I would think the lack of mass transit would make it more and more difficult to cram than many (50-70k) in the one square mile of the downtown core. Every new residential development would have to have dedicated parking which would and does prohibit the true potential of downtown Detroit. But then there is the notion that downtown could become a very walkable, retail and amenity rich neighborhood which would entice more people to live carless and open opportunities for car sharing businesses to thrive. I still really can't imagine a downtown Detroit with 70,000 residents. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1865 Registered: 10-2003 |
This isn't really anything new. I did laugh, however, at the part that 30-40% of people want driveable neighborhoods. Walkable neighborhoods ARE driveable. Neighborhoods oriented towards cars, though, aren't so walkable. | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 777 Registered: 03-2006 |
Danindc, I think his point is that walkable neighborhoods may not be "parkable." | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1866 Registered: 10-2003 |
Yeah, God forbid you have to park on street, and then suffer the torturous injustice of walking a block or two. ;-) | ||
Dialh4hipster Member Username: Dialh4hipster Post Number: 1816 Registered: 11-2004 |
Well, I think ultimately he means suburbanites. There are, in fact, people who like that lifestyle. | ||
Spitty Member Username: Spitty Post Number: 489 Registered: 07-2004 |
Hmmm, and what percentage of Americans are obese? http://www.webmd.com/content/a rticle/51/49823.htm Maybe there is a correlation between obesity and the people who want to drive everywhere. I wonder what percentage of people would prefer to have someone else wipe their ass for them as well. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 384 Registered: 05-2005 |
Mindfield- Sounds like you're against people living in the city who are employed. I didn't realize that people with a household income of $59k were "ultra rich". Sounds to me like they are just people with jobs. | ||
Spitty Member Username: Spitty Post Number: 490 Registered: 07-2004 |
They should have called this "Developers aim to get Detroit off its fat ass" | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 778 Registered: 03-2006 |
lol Spitty.  But really Danindc, an urban area with lots of buildings for lots of uses (residential, commercial, entertainment, offices, etc.) and little parking space or open space is the most walkable. Of course it's drivable too as long as it has streets. But the lack of space dedicated to parking makes these places less "parkable." It seems to me that the main issue with cars is traffic and parking (not to mention the socio-economic issues). Really the Detroit suburbs are LESS drivable and than Detroit because there's much more traffic. With the exception of a few compact areas in Detroit and a handful of older suburbs, the suburbs and the city are about the same for parkability. Spitty, studies have shown that the average suburbanite in America is 6 lbs. heavier than those in the city. | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 779 Registered: 03-2006 |
quote\ {Every new residential development would have to have dedicated parking which would and does prohibit the true potential of downtown Detroit.} Put all the parking underground. Problem solved. | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 3092 Registered: 10-2003 |
NOw my thing is, with my limited knowledge of Urban Planning, is that you can have the most dense, walkable city in the nation...but it will all be for naught if there is no effective transit in place ASIDE from cars. | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 780 Registered: 03-2006 |
^ Really? You just made me ponder -- if everything was built in the classic urbanist style and there was no transit -- only cars (well maybe cabs and buses like we have now) -- and all parking was built underground beneath the structures -- why wouldn't it work? | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 3093 Registered: 10-2003 |
i mean now underground parking would be cool becuase it will free up space for other types of development (once again with my limited knowledge). I am not saying underground parking wont work. I think it will. But as we all know it is madd expensive. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1867 Registered: 10-2003 |
Eastsidedog, I completely agree. My neighborhood, while fairly dense (average lot size is 0.02 acres), is extremely walkable. No one seems to complain about not finding a parking spot on the street, though. Increased walkability actually decreases the need for the *redundant* parking found in the burbs, since most people will walk 5-10 minutes rather than drive. Thanks to our "God-given" right to drive everywhere, the United States averages over 4 parking spots per registered automobile. Your car can only park in one of 'em at a time. Makes you wonder what the other three spots are doing.... | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 3094 Registered: 10-2003 |
lol... Ummm...sitting there empty Dan....? | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 781 Registered: 03-2006 |
0.02? Are you sure? Are these rowhouses or apartments? My single family home in Detroit is on 0.1 acres. | ||
French777 Member Username: French777 Post Number: 3 Registered: 10-2006 |
I bet it will be walkable in the near future but i live in Rochester Hills so i don't get to downtown as much as i would like too. What's up with that Asian town i herd about | ||
Sharmaal Member Username: Sharmaal Post Number: 951 Registered: 09-2004 |
Welcome French777! If you want to know about Asian Town, I would suggest looking at this thread. https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/5/85622.html?1161812395 | ||
Dhugger Member Username: Dhugger Post Number: 94 Registered: 03-2005 |
Danindc: "the United States averages over 4 parking spots per registered automobile." Is this a solid number for U.S. parking...really? How come in my 'inner-ring' neighborhood with 2 car garages no one seems to have room to park their cars inside. The garages are jammed with useless stuff. So the cars are in the drive way and all over the street. Go figure. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 327 Registered: 08-2006 |
My DETROIT neighborhood is pretty dense with commercial businesses along a main street. Its sort of set up in a walkable form, as parking is very sparse. Its not as vibrant as it was10-20 years ago, (hint: not 7 and Gratiot, but it is Eastside) | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 236 Registered: 04-2006 |
There is strong support for a one half cent county transit sales tax with a one half cent county sales tax for roads. This could improve public bus service and bring in light rail which could generate more job opportunities. Can this idea help make these plans for Detroit work? Comments please | ||
Ray Member Username: Ray Post Number: 809 Registered: 06-2004 |
Doesn't it sort of depress you guys that the region had to get a tutorial on walkability from some professor, as if this is some kind of new fangled idea. Trainman, I forget. What is the proposition we're supposed to vote for/against next month? | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 556 Registered: 02-2006 |
What's interesting about downtown Detroit real estate is that the pricing structure just completely skipped today's market rate, and is being priced completely on spec. Certainly, a few people will buy that, and when they're bought, the speculative price goes up and up, but at what point does it catch up to demand, and people realize that things are overpriced? Condos in excellent areas of Chicago are selling for cheaper than some developments want in Detroit. I think some developers are making grave errors in pricing. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4588 Registered: 10-2003 |
Ray, Detroit isn't the first city that has learned how to walk, again. In fact, it's not the first, nor will it be the last, of the older more established cities that is learning to walk again. It's kind of sad, but it's an American thing, not a Detroit-specific issue. | ||
Zephyrprocess Member Username: Zephyrprocess Post Number: 106 Registered: 08-2006 |
Recall that a shopping mall builds enough parking to handle their maximum demand, around the holiday season. So one of your additional three spaces is probably at Great Lakes Crossing. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1868 Registered: 10-2003 |
I think I read the "4 parking spots per car" stat in Suburban Nation, by Duany and Plater-Zyberk. My house actually sits on 0.03 acres (corner lot). Most other houses in the neighborhood are on 0.02 acres: rowhouses with a garden in front and a garden/patio/parking spot in rear. | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 783 Registered: 03-2006 |
Interesting Danindc. Actually my house is technically on a 0.03 lot but we bought the small empty lot next to us giving us 0.1 acres. How do you fit parking AND a house on 0.03 acres? Our house takes up almost all of the land of our original 0.03 acres. It must be REALLY tight. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 557 Registered: 02-2006 |
Traffic congestion. Picture Chicago traffic now, then add 1,000,000 more single-occupancy vehicles on the street daily (approximate average weekday El ridership, excluding bus + Metra weekday ridership). It'd be ridiculous. Incidentally, I don't know if it's because of the bigger blocks in Chicago or what, but my house is on .08 acres, which I think is the standard Chicago city lot. ~25x125. (Message edited by focusonthed on October 27, 2006) | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1871 Registered: 10-2003 |
Eastside, I think I was unclear in my last post. The back of the house is usually *one* of those three things. Very rarely would you have a patio in addition to a parking spot. Parking at my house is strictly on-street. Focus, I need to correct your number. Weekday L ridership is actually just north of 500,000.
http://www.yourcta.com/welcome /overview.html#a | ||
Swingline Member Username: Swingline Post Number: 612 Registered: 11-2003 |
Cmon Eastside, I'm sorry but underground parking is not feasible for pretty much any residential situation in Detroit because of the cost. It's simply not feasible in this market for the foreseable (50 years) future. It won't happen, plain and simple. It's kind of like wishing for a subway. Yeah, engineers could build it, but it will never happen. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 558 Registered: 02-2006 |
Danindc, I got lazy and used Wikipedia (oops), they said 640,000. CTA reports 539,000. My bad. Correct my number to around 835,000 - 840,000 commuters by rail. | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 2042 Registered: 12-2004 |
There is. http://findarticles.com/p/arti cles/mi_go2644/is_200209/ai_n7 111693 | ||
Pmardo Member Username: Pmardo Post Number: 28 Registered: 03-2006 |
I took a class with Leinberger last year at UM. He stressed that the city requirement for new housing units to include onsite parking should be abolished and that parking should be transferred to the private market. Thus, if a developer wants to renovate a building and not worry about parking, they can do so. If there is resident demand for parking to be included, the developer can purchase spots from all of the already exisiting structures. In this scenario developers have an easier time with their projects and spend a lot less on ugly onsite parking ("ding-bats", ugly surface lots, or big parking structures instead of functional buildings). Parking is solved with the existing infrastructure and developers can choose how to handle the individual parking needs of their clients. Underground parking runs close to $10,000/spot! | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3005 Registered: 08-2004 |
Weren't banks one of the reasons for parking stipulations? No parking, no loan. |
