Seattle-area retail discussion

[BoulderGrad]

Originally Posted by CrazyAboutCities

I kinda wish that Northgate Mall would become one of world's largest shopping malls (call me crazy if you want to!) because it is first shopping mall built in USA. It would be nice to have one in Seattle metro area. Obviously, it will not happen period.

I hope one of these days downtown Seattle will get another vertical shopping mall with more than 6 stories.

Westlake Center needs to get renovated soon because of interior of this shopping mall is outdated and attract more retailers.

Yes, people still do hang out at shopping malls. I seen so many cliques at Seattle shopping malls in the past two and half years of living in Seattle.

Hehe... ooohhhh crazy....

[CrazyAboutCities]

Originally Posted by BoulderGrad

Hehe... ooohhhh crazy....

[-KwK345-]

Originally Posted by BoulderGrad

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but when he says "open space" he simply means land that has not been built on yet. It doesn't specifically mean a grassy meadow in the middle of nowhere. It could very well have forest on it, it could also be a mud bog, a scrub meadow etc. etc. The idea of it is that its an area where nature is being left to itself.

Oh!

[taiwanesedrummer36]

I would like to see urban villages with 10-story retail buildings. The urban village theme is great, but needs a more "shop, shop, shop till you drop" feel.
So imagine adding like millions of retailers to Bellevue Square, but dividing the entire complex into an urban village setting.

[guinessbeer55]

No I dont want to see anymore malls downtown...
downtown needs more streetfront retail... especially where it is most demanded- in the shopping district.

[taiwanesedrummer36]

Originally Posted by guinessbeer55

No I dont want to see anymore malls downtown...
downtown needs more streetfront retail... especially where it is most demanded- in the shopping district.

Yeah, streetfront retail with thousands of big-name stores, IN AN URBAN VILLAGE SETTING, NO MATTER WHERE! Did you not get what I said above?!

[BoulderGrad]

Originally Posted by taiwanesedrummer36

Yeah, streetfront retail with thousands of big-name stores, IN AN URBAN VILLAGE SETTING, NO MATTER WHERE! Did you not get what I said above?!

I agree with you that we should have urban villages with street-front retail everywhere we can in this city, and I do see that happening in a lot of places.

But is it just me, or do a lot of the new apartment complexes that are going in have some pretty useless retail and services in the lower floors? How many insurance salesmen, massage centers, and tanning booths do we really need? I'm glad to see Grocery stores becoming more popular, but where are the hardware stores (we're talking small neighborhood hardware, not lumber yards)? Where are the drug stores? Where are the Music Stores? Where's a good indie bookstore? You know... the places normal people usually frequent. Most of those are still banished to strip malls, old single story buildings, and major shopping centers. As the satellite urban centers of Seattle grow bigger and bigger, I'd really like to see more of the useful services in town instead of yoga centers and vitamin shops.

Of course, if any of you know of a town center that has these things, I'll rent there next year

[taiwanesedrummer36]

Originally Posted by BoulderGrad

I agree with you that we should have urban villages with street-front retail everywhere we can in this city, and I do see that happening in a lot of places.

But is it just me, or do a lot of the new apartment complexes that are going in have some pretty useless retail and services in the lower floors? How many insurance salesmen, massage centers, and tanning booths do we really need? I'm glad to see Grocery stores becoming more popular, but where are the hardware stores (we're talking small neighborhood hardware, not lumber yards)? Where are the drug stores? Where are the Music Stores? Where's a good indie bookstore? You know... the places normal people usually frequent. Most of those are still banished to strip malls, old single story buildings, and major shopping centers. As the satellite urban centers of Seattle grow bigger and bigger, I'd really like to see more of the useful services in town instead of yoga centers and vitamin shops.

Of course, if any of you know of a town center that has these things, I'll rent there next year

I guess the only ones I know of is University Village and Redmond Town Center. Mill Creek is pretty boring (only Central Market rocks!) and the future Mukilteo Town Center and Port Gardner Wharf look pretty puny. But there might be hope for the Everett Riverfront development, but I doubt it.

And thank GOD someone finally agrees with me on something.

[BoulderGrad]

Originally Posted by taiwanesedrummer36

And thank GOD someone finally agrees with me on something.

Haha, you mean YOU finally agree with US

[-KwK345-]

Originally Posted by arbeiter

are you just a seattle admirer from afar?

Yes

Originally Posted by BoulderGrad

Many of the forests you walk through are second and third growth forests.

Where?

So if there wasn't any logging there would be way more old growth trees and forests?

Originally Posted by BoulderGrad

Also if you look out on some of the mountains in the cascades, you will see many treeless patches on the sides of mountains.

But they can't log in the National Parks.

[Bond James Bond]

Originally Posted by kevin_wk

Where?

So if there wasn't any logging there would be way more old growth trees and forests?

Of course!

But they can't log in the National Parks.

National parks only take up a small portion of the Cascades. Most of the Cascades are National Forests, which can be logged on. There are also some areas owned by timber companies.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by BoulderGrad

I agree with you that we should have urban villages with street-front retail everywhere we can in this city, and I do see that happening in a lot of places.

But is it just me, or do a lot of the new apartment complexes that are going in have some pretty useless retail and services in the lower floors? How many insurance salesmen, massage centers, and tanning booths do we really need? I'm glad to see Grocery stores becoming more popular, but where are the hardware stores (we're talking small neighborhood hardware, not lumber yards)? Where are the drug stores? Where are the Music Stores? Where's a good indie bookstore? You know... the places normal people usually frequent. Most of those are still banished to strip malls, old single story buildings, and major shopping centers. As the satellite urban centers of Seattle grow bigger and bigger, I'd really like to see more of the useful services in town instead of yoga centers and vitamin shops.

The problem is we require retail in locations where it's not merited. So we have a lot of useless retail, and our good retail streets also suffer from the diffusion of customers.

I am seeing some interesting stores in new buildings with underused retail. But that's difficult because many of these stores rely on heavy pedestrian traffic too. We don't have many locations with great retail storefronts and lots of pedestrian traffic that are cheap. That said, some older retail streets like the LQA business district have lots of what you're talking about, like used books and a couple music stores. PS, SLU is getting a little hardware store.

[citruspastels]

i think the problem may be that so many of these new retail locations are pretty expensive brand new and in up and coming neighborhoods, so the stores stick to what works, and market to the high-end people living in the condos. i think as these areas start to mature a little, more pedestrian traffic will come, the "newness factor" may die down a little, and rents will go down. i think that's when we will start to see a more solid neighborhood identity emerge and the bookstores and hardware stores can begin moving in.

i mean, most neighborhoods that have been around for awhile have that kind of store- like the u-district, freemont, capitol hill, or even roosevelt.

i actually think it will be good in the long run that we have a huge amount of "useless retail," because as the city center densifies more, there will be way more people walking around and in need of amenities, and they will be able to move in no problem since supply and demand will keep the cost of renting a storefront down.

[mhays]

As the city densifies, more buildings will be built that can contain retail. We don't need to stock up in advance.

In Seattle, the tanning salons are there because the landlords can't lease the space otherwise. Developers will tell you that outside of certain districts, their retail leases for less than the development cost -- the build it because it's required, and both they and their financiers know it won't make money. So the residents subsidize the underleased retail. It's a factor in our housing cost problems.

No city on earth can support retail on all streets for an extended area. I've taken long walks in Hong Kong, Tokyo, London, and many other cities, and every one concentrates retail aside from certain districts. Try walking around a Hong Kong neighborhood that's wall-to-wall 50-story apartments, with 5x or 10x the density as Seattle's densest tract...and be amazed that while the next block over is a great retail street, the street you're on is quiet except as residents come and go. Or go to London, where most retail outside of "downtown" retail districts is on high streets.

[citruspastels]

i know chicago has lots of retail spread out downtown besides the two major shopping streets. tons of cities in europe do too- certainly including london. of course, every city has its shopping corridors and market streets, but for general stores, grocery stores, hardware stores, or whatever-- they need places that are close to the residents they serve and don't need to be on main corridors. the kind of stores that go in there aren't there for tourists, or even necessarily for residents from other parts of the city. isn't manhattan like that? i don't know ive never been. isn't that what seattle's downtown is kind of going for? it would be a pain in the ass to me if every time needed food at my mom's apartment in downtown chicago, i had to walk through the crowds on michigan avenue to get to the grocery store. instead, i can just go down a block or two and voila! no large crowds of tourists or clothing shoppers involved.

[-KwK345-]

Originally Posted by Bond James Bond

Most of the Cascades are National Forests, which can be logged on.

That sucks! Beautiful natural scenery is getting destroyed! But it's not like eventually all the national forest will be smaller 2nd or 3rd gen. trees right?

Kind of ironic that national forests can be logged on. What is the point of the area being a national forest if it can be logged?

[BoulderGrad]

Originally Posted by kevin_wk

That sucks! Beautiful natural scenery is getting destroyed! But it's not like eventually all the national forest will be smaller 2nd or 3rd gen. trees right?

In virgin forests, many of the trees are over 500 years old. In Sequoia National Park, some are estimated to be over 1000 years old. Think logging companies will wait that long?

[mhays]

Originally Posted by citruspastels

i know chicago has lots of retail spread out downtown besides the two major shopping streets. tons of cities in europe do too- certainly including london. of course, every city has its shopping corridors and market streets, but for general stores, grocery stores, hardware stores, or whatever-- they need places that are close to the residents they serve and don't need to be on main corridors. the kind of stores that go in there aren't there for tourists, or even necessarily for residents from other parts of the city. isn't manhattan like that? i don't know ive never been. isn't that what seattle's downtown is kind of going for? it would be a pain in the ass to me if every time needed food at my mom's apartment in downtown chicago, i had to walk through the crowds on michigan avenue to get to the grocery store. instead, i can just go down a block or two and voila! no large crowds of tourists or clothing shoppers involved.

Manhattan has about half the street frontage per square mile that Belltown does. So if they have twice the pedestrians, the average 100 yards has four times as many. This is a big but often-ignored factor. Standard Manhattan blocks are 180'x850' while ours are 240x240 or 240x360. Manhattan avenues manage to be busy because there's one every 950' or so (including street width), but the cross streets tend to be pretty quiet, and outside of major areas they often don't have much retail.

I can't speak to Chicago because I don't know it very well.

London sustains great retail over districts like SoHo and Covent Garden, but even some of its biggest retail districts are mostly along single roads -- Oxford Street and Knightsbridge are great examples. Walk one block and you might be on a quiet residential street. London also has much bigger blocks than we do, on average, so much less frontage.

Yes, all of those places have lots of groceries scattered around including back streets. That sort of retail is appropriate for Belltown. But that could be accomplished by my preferred plan, where 95% of the new retail is along a couple avenues, and only scattered "corner" retail is built on other streets. Or at least that would be my plan if we could start over -- at this point, Belltown has no chance at any one street being great continuous retail, and anything we did would hurt some of the existing retail in various ways.

[citruspastels]

yeah, belltown isn't very good when it comes to retail, but as a residential neighborhood its pretty cool. needs that grocery store though...

as far as chicago goes, it sounds fairly similar to your description of manhattan.

[-KwK345-]

Originally Posted by BoulderGrad

In virgin forests, many of the trees are over 500 years old. In Sequoia National Park, some are estimated to be over 1000 years old. Think logging companies will wait that long?

What do you mean?