Strap in Ladies and Gentleman. This might be a long one. I’ll try to keep it straight-forward…
If it wasn’t for Detroit’s unique position to capitalize on its characteristics that are unlike any typical western city, I would not feel as driven to work here. Detroit has the potential to become a representational city of how to revitalize urban communities in the 21st century. The decline of major manufacturing is turning our cities into ghost towns (Detroit isn’t the only one- look at all major industrial cities), and I strongly believe that major commercial retail will be next to go. Yep- it might be decades before we really notice the difference, but something is shifting. Everything I read, hear, study, and analyze is based on the main principle that consumerism as we know is changing. People are beginning to realize the destructiveness of a linear production system on our planet and many just simply cannot afford the mass consumption lifestyle that was once a reality for many of us.
The Story of Stuff does a great job of explaining why a mass consumption lifestyle became the norm over the last 50 years, and exploits what the true cost is of a linear production system. If you haven’t seen the video or explored the website yet, you can find it here.
We are just beginning to see patterns emerge that point to a shrinking consumer culture. The entire conversation about shrinking cities, growing food/the local movement, and certainly everything presented in James Howard Kunstler’s work, suggests that people are seriously interested in recreating a time of village-like community oriented living. Cities in the 21st century and beyond will need to reflect this. I don’t think we’re going to see too many luxury skyscraper condominiums going up anymore (look at the Chicago Spire- the budget for that monstronsity dried up post fall 2008 by no coincidence… and the site is still sitting empty today.)
I think that attracting large mainstream retailers to downtown Detroit will offer little value and long-term consequences. In order to arrive into the 21st century mindset on time, we need to be proactive, not reactive. Detroit needs to show the world that it is thinking ahead, not simply copying the progressive actions of others who were innovating decades beforehand.
In a sense we’re lucky, because we won’t need to experience the undoing that cities like Chicago and New York are going to go through, eventually. I see no reason why those cities won’t go through a similar decline, although perhaps not as severe. But, their response is going to need to be the same as Detroit’s.
Consider the pop-up shop trend, which is huge in London. Even a big brand like Doc Martens opted for a pop-up shop in Spitalfields Market ,rather than committing to a permanent retail space in the area. The real question to be argued here is: Is this kind of decision the effect of the present recession or is there a gradual yet permanent shift occurring? (I welcome your comments!)
So what is the solution? Well, have you noticed all of the local, independently-owned retail shops popping up? What if we did more to empower would-be retailers to set up shop, and simply narrow the scope of retail in general, making way for more civically minded activities and areas like parks, farms, festivals, and education/entertainment centers. These things are going to be huge players in every city in the decades to come. Retail will thrive in temporary pop-up shops, festivals, and semi-permanent/part-time channels like space at market stalls or downtown street kiosks.
I mean frankly, do any of us really need to go shopping at a 50,000 square foot warehouse in the middle of a concrete jungle on top of what used to be a wetland?
It’s going to take more work, but our quality of life will be more rewarding, if we learn to be more community-centric in our consuming. And I strongly believe that it will benefit Detroit and other cities far better than whoring ourselves out to any unethical and un-community oriented chain stores. To be fair, they would of course be welcome if they adopt their own businesses to meet the changing urban needs of these times. But that’s going to mean a major overhaul of many very bureaucratic organizations, and aspiring would-be retailers/creative enterprises are going to be able to respond faster, with a lot help (money) from their friends and family, etc.
A sales tax holiday for 10 years would fit in brilliantly with all of this, without needing any help from companies like Gap (who of course also own Old Navy, Banana Republic and Bath & Body Works, etc.) If the city government could work to make this happen along with easing the process of setting up new business in the city, then we’ll have even more Leopold’s Books and “Good Girls” type businesses, both locally-owned and independently created. There’s momentum with these types of businesses and they shouldn’t be overlooked. Adding typical chain retailers to Detroit will not make anyone care more about Detroit. To the contrary, The reason why most Detroiters care so much about the city is because of their fellow new business owners and the friendly community they’re creating. Not to mention the fact that a place like The Gap will cause any fashion retailer in the city to have to complete with outrageously unrealistic margins and won’t be able to afford to maintain their businesses if they try to compete. And cheap, homogenized, bland retail is not going to create the kind of environment that will attract a vibrant culture of residents.
If there was ever a time and place in history to fully get behind independent and small businesses, this would be it and Detroit would be the place. Let’s not miss this opportunity to decrease retail/consumer mediocrity. The new mainstream consumer is beginning to demand ethical/responsibly sourced merchandise for a fair price and with a unique quality. Hey, rather than attracting the nearby suburban shoppers, why don’t we position Detroit as the most unique shopping city in the country and attract interested parties from all over? It’s a bold idea, but one completely worth exploring before we fall back on the bland, boring, not to mention often unethical big brands that have already ruined other cities’ characters (and I’ll say one more time that Detroit’s character is the only thing that it has going for itself and the only thing that keeps people like us interested!)
My favorite author on the subject of creative city initiatives, Charles Landry, offers the following perspective in his book The Creative City:
Shopping centres are usually formulaic, lack local distinctiveness, have no real public space.They rarely retain natural features; the mix of shops is predictable; opportunities are rarely taken to integrate public buildings such as an arts centre or a library. Distinctiveness is key, for although cities draw on each other, the danger is that pioneering cities around the world quickly become textbook case studies for city officials. Cities then tend to adopt generic models of success without taking into account the local characteristics and conditions that contributed to those successes. The result is a homegenous pastiche of building- aquariums, convention centres, museums, shops, and restaurants- that prove to be remarkably similar the world over. If you replaced one city name by another you would not know the difference.
Promoting local distinctiveness can be difficult. In Liverpool, people appreciated the character of the place, its creativity and rebelliousness while outsiders liked that eccentricity in a framework of security: city marketers emphasized either one or the other. The city marketing task is to show that, under the surface, the city is diverse and vibrant, but that is not immediately readable or dramatic. Tourism promotion can damage what makes a city attractive by pushing out local identity. Peter Hall’s analysis of innovative cities shows how outsider cities cut off from the mainstream are often the most innovative- Los Angeles, Memphis or Detroit, Glasgow or Manchester at different periods of their lives.
The workings of capital produce tension between reducing cost and increasing value and quality. This assessment shapes the built environment where there is a constant temptation to focus on short-term profits by reducing quality rather than generating longer-term value. This requires doing ‘context evaluations’ of real cost and benefits going beyond the project itself.
In other words, suburbanites traveling downtown just to snag a deal at The Gap will not create a sense of PLACE, which is the real value of any town or city, and is most certainly the concept that Detroit needs to make No. 1 priority.
As far as general consumer behavior goes, we need to change our collective mindset. Some major retailers are beginning to respond to the demand for organic, local, etc. This is a trend that shouldn’t be ignored. We need to focus on rewiring consumer behavior in the same way that we need to encourage people to take climate change seriously. It’s coming, but it will take a while. However, we can get Detroit ready now, and we can create a PLACE where forward-thinking individuals flourish and set a good example.
Another option is this. Let’s create a massive local movement, and force the major retailers to respond. If I have a choice between Gap and something unique from a Detroit boutique, I’ll go with the boutique simply based on its unique offering even if it costs 2x as much. But what could really work here is some cooperative solutions between local makers (hello, CCS wonder designers) and the chain stores. If anyone still feels like we absolutely must have a Gap, what if it was a conceptual Gap that stocked some regular Gap products but also promoted the work of local designers through competitions and design briefs? Kind of like how H&M commissions people like Stella McCartney to design a line, but in reverse by commissioning common folk (emerging Detroit designers) in a competition format, and if they win then they get their designs produced and sold at the downtown Detroit Gap and a percentage of the proceeds goes into a fund for them to start their own Detroit-based brand or open a boutique (depending on their aspirations… design or merchandising, or both.) That would solve the problem of having to find companies with the money to set up shop in that downtown stretch of Woodward yet could simultaneously promote local makers and create some place identity along with meeting the needs of both the average joe Gap shopper and the forward-thinkers I’m certain Detroit will be full of in time.
However, I see that as a last resort. Granted we can’t control who decides to take advantage of that space, but we can look for ways of securing the opportunities for more authentic businesses.
What if there was a Spitalfields Market type model in that stretch of Woodward? If you’re not entirely familiar, Spitalfields (massive shopping centre in East London), features a mixed-format retail opportunity for essentially any brand big or small. There are large chain restaurants (Wagamama, Giraffe, etc.), mixed in with market stalls in the centre (low barrier to entry), temporary pop-up space, (low-to-mid barrier to entry- good for prototyping), and then high-end boutique space (the $200 dress kind of boutique.) It works because there is literally something for everyone. Even with food, there is the small “come get these cookies I just baked” kiosks set up next to the massive chain-style eateries. Something like this could support an Eastern Market annex and an amalgam of different types of retail.
Another thought I just had is if we could magically discourage the cliche suburb chains like Gap and attract the higher quality yet still affordable and popular retailers that other cities have but aren’t otherwise available in Michigan. If we could attract TopShop, for example, to set up in Detroit instead of Somerset, then every bubble-gum chomping suburban teenager and 20-something female would make at least one patronage to get their signature Kate Moss inspired wares.
Here’s another suggestion from Charles Landry:
The cliche ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’ may have some truth, but it does more harm than good in modern cities. Where issues are addressed only reactively they are already problems if not crises, and responses are defined by the problems themselves, so we are forced to deal with yesterday’s problem not tomorrow’s opportunity. The pace of urban change demands that policy makers be forward-looking, proactive, and address issues which are not yet problematic. Trends need monitoring accurately to detect little changes that may become significant in the future.
Detroit is, will be, and should be, a niche city. We’re not trying to create another Chicago or another Manhattan (right?) I think you can absolutely ‘just have niche stores’ in Detroit. I don’t see how destination stores (um, Pottery Barn? Sick of talking about the Gap) will drive anymore shoppers downtown then the niche shops will. Quite the contrary, people will shop downtown in boutiques anywhere- to get things they can’t get at the mall.
Enter the 21st Century Mom & Pop: local, independently-owned retailers with a conscience towards community/social responsibility, and a creative/innovative product offering. Whether you see it as us returning to an older tradition or creating a new phenomenon, it’s these types of businesses that give a city its sense of place.
Written by Bethany Betzler
bethany@ideaengineeringagency.com
