(This was originally a letter the planning firm that was hired to create a redevelopment plan for Riverfront East.)

Thank you for your work on the presentation of your firm’s preliminary thoughts and designs regarding the East Riverfront (Rivertown). As you could see by the large turn-out at a relatively unadvertised meetings (approximately 150 people attended the second meeting on 14 Nov 02), we Detroiters are very thankful that there appears to be enough governmental and civic leadership interest in the redevelopment of Rivertown that its rebirth may have a reasonable chance for success.

There are many great ideas embedded in your work and presentation. The Board of Cityscape Detroit, comprised of several urban planners, preservationists, and community development professionals, would like to provide a critique of some of the information that was presented. Cityscape Detroit has been at the forefront regarding advocating for the preservation and adaptive reuse of Detroit’s Rivertown district, even prior to the casino announcement in 1998. One of our Board members has been a seven year resident of Rivertown and lived within ½ block of the proposed casino district, and several current and former members of our Board of Directors attended the 7 and 14 November meetings.

As you may not know, Cityscape Detroit advocates for improved quality of life for metropolitan Detroit through sound preservation, planning, architecture, and urban design actions and principles. Our role model is the Municipal Arts Society in your New York City. Our comments, suggestions, and hopes for the redevelopment of Rivertown follow.

Limit Open Space South of Atwater While Building Waterfront Greenway/Promenade

The overall notion of creating a waterfront greenway/promenade along the Rivertown waterfront is of great importance; however, we strongly believe that the amount of land set aside from development should be limited. Much of the basis for this idea for a large park has been common wisdom here in Detroit that all land south of Atwater St. should to be given over to open space. This notion is questionable for several reasons.

Detroit is in the dire need of increasing its tax base. While guaranteeing public access to the waterfront should be preeminent, turning the remainder of the land south of Atwater over to public parks should not be permitted or encouraged. This land south of Atwater is prime development property and could mean millions of tax dollars annually to the City of Detroit and the school district. A waterfront green connection between Downtown, the three linked riverfront parks, and Belle Isle is needed and would be a great benefit to the region, while the large proposed south of Atwater parks would eat up large amounts of developable taxable land between Atwater and the waterfront. Even though Rivertown is three miles long, once development is completed, hopefully in less than 20 years, approximately 1/5 to 1/6 of entire district’s developable land would be lost if development south of Atwater is restricted.

The existing three medium-sized parks would easily accommodate the active and passive recreational needs of the new residents, residents located immediately to the north of Rivertown, other Detroiters, and visitors without the need for expansive new parks in the area. More large park space south of Atwater could also pull needed resources and focus away from the rest of the City’s sorely under-funded parks.

Not only is there lots of parks within the district, there are large amounts of public open space on all sides of the district. Just east of study area is Belle Isle, which is the largest island park in the United States and the large Gabriel Richard Park. To the north is the large Lafayette central park, and to the west is Hart Plaza. With all of this public open space and parks, more large parks extending the length of the district south of Atwater is far beyond what the community or City requires. The financial resources saved from building this park or parks could be spent on other needed improvements in the Rivertown district.

Waterfront Greenway/Promenade Extension through Gabriel Richard Park

To create a well utilized waterfront greenway/promenade, we recommend that a strong connection to the east be built into the project. There are several significant neighborhoods (eastern half of Islandview, West Village National Register and Local Historic District, Indian Village National Register and Local Historic District, and the Gold Coast apartment district) and their residents that would benefit by the greenway/promenade extending east through Gabriel Richard Park and back up to Jefferson, near the Armory. Please see attached Cityscape Detroit Neighborhood Guide for location of these neighborhoods. This connection between the neighborhoods and the greenway/promenade could easily be accomplished by extending it from Uniroyal under the MacArthur bridge and along the water’s edge. Many potential greenway/promenade users east of Rivertown would be connected directly to downtown for the first time by a non-motorized path system.

Creation of a Two-sided Atwater St.

A secondary reason for permitting significant development south of Atwater is to ensure that a two-sided urban street is created along Atwater. We are confident that your firm recognizes that there are almost no lively urban streets in the world with only one side that is developed with buildings and activities. For Atwater to become a spine to this Rivertown district, this should be taken into account and development permitted south of Atwater.

Creation of a Destination Urban District

The City of Detroit currently does not have a true urban neighborhood with medium density residential and commercial interspersed. The region direly needs this type of district where young adults and empty-nesters want to and have the opportunity to live in such an environment. Rivertown is Detroit’s best place for this type of community to be created due to several factors including: its great waterfront amenity, safe surrounding neighborhoods, and defined neighborhood boundaries. Until Detroit and the region develops this type of district, the brain-drain of young metro Detroit adults, who graduate from college and move to New York, Chicago, Portland, Atlanta, etc. without ever giving consideration to returning to their home town to live and work, will continue unabated. It also makes it nearly impossible for the region to recruit new young adults just out of college or graduated school to move to the area. This problem is evidenced by a local saying that "you either grew up in Detroit, married a Detroiter or work for the auto companies."

An example of what is possible is located nearby. Since 1995, Cleveland has created over 5,000 units of housing in their loft district adjacent to downtown. There is such a pent-up demand in Detroit, that this rapid level of development is easily achievable. To make it a destination like LoDo and Cleveland’s warehouse district, Rivertown most use a mixture of old and new to create a sense of place that can not be found with only new construction or in the suburbs. Good and successful urban redevelopment districts must have an authentic and historic feel to them.

No to a "Lakeshore Drive."

We believe that a new "Lakeshore Drive" would be detrimental to the development of the Rivertown district, and it is not necessary as a district or regional amenity. Again, Detroit’s local conventional wisdom is to develop this type of drive. The distance between Atwater St. and the river makes this nearly visually possible. If there was an effort to try to realign Atwater closer to the riverbank, the existing developments and parks would hamper this effort. In addition, Detroit already has a beautiful lakeshore drive that circles Belle Isle.

Second, the creation of a "Lakeshore Drive" in Rivertown would encourage cruising in the district by creating another venue where cruising is possible. This type of activity would be a major detriment to area’s redevelopment. Jefferson Ave. is currently undriveable on many summer nights due to young adults cruising along Jefferson Ave. between downtown and Belle Isle. This activity has been a huge detriment to the near eastside communities by making Jefferson Ave. impassible at times and uncomfortable for some residents due to raucous behavior of the participants people playing loud music and other behaviors. A riverfront drive could become a secondary cruising route for these individuals.

The "Lakeshore Drive" could create a significant detrimental activity in an area where the development of a walkable desirable urban community is the primary desirable outcome.

Development for Uniroyal Site.

As mentioned above, it is vitally important for the future health of metropolitan Detroit to have an urban district that will help the region to capture and keep young adults. Therefore, please strongly urge and recommend that the Uniroyal site be proposed for new medium and high density development and not preserved for open space. As mentioned previously in the section on limiting open space south of Atwater, there are two large parks in the immediate vicinity of the site.

Environmental clean-up of the site to limited residential or commercial environmental closure is feasibly possible, especially with the variety of brownfield financing available in the State of Michigan (Michigan leads the nation in the remediation of brownfields). Uniroyal may also qualify as a Superfund site.

Trolley Connection to Downtown.

For Rivertown to really thrive, it must be physically connected to downtown. The most cost-effective approach to achieve this physical connection is by extending the trolley line around the waterside of the Renaissance Center and out along either Atwater (if it is a double sided street) or along Franklin St. For transportation to work for visitors and tourists, it must be of the fixed rail approach. Buses will not work for these groups. They need to be convinced that they will be able to find the system’s pick-up points for the return trip. This is assured with a fixed rail system. With minimal investment, this extension could spur significant growth. Memphis, TN installed a trolley along a 2.5 mile long corridor a decade ago and within 5 years, new development totally over 5 times the cost of building the system was built or underway along the trolley route. This successful system is currently being expanded. This physical connection would help to build a synergy between downtown and Rivertown that may not occur if the two districts are not connected. The system would also physically connect the many current and future nodes of activity in Rivertown to downtown including: 1) new residential, 2) new office and commercial, 3) the existing bars and restaurants, 4) Belle Isle, 5) the Rivertown parks, and 6) existing residential projects (Harbortown and Stroh Riverplace).

Rehabilitation: A Priority, not "only where feasible."

Rivertown has a unique physical character defined by the narrow streets, use of brick, and the low-scale light manufacturing buildings found throughout the district. It is partly this character that will allow the district to become a destination living place for young adults, empty-nesters, and visitors. Even a modest amount of demolition of these remaining structures may destroy the district’s character and make redevelopment more difficult. Some limited loss of structures is of course necessary, but it should be minimized!

The argument that all rehabilitation projects need to be economically feasible without subsidy in Detroit is baseless. There are no unsubsidized medium or large scale projects developed in Detroit in the last 30 years. Therefore, it is not appropriate to require all rehabilitation projects in the Rivertown district to meet the "where economically feasible requirement." It is vitally important to retain the district’s unique character through the preservation of remaining buildings. Since preservation of the district’s unique sense of place is necessary, those projects that are not economically feasible should be subsidized (of course, within reason). The district’s unique character will speed its redevelopment and make it experientially interesting for visitors. This district character preservation should be of utmost importance in your proposals.

It is also important that the district retain the buildings so that visitor to MotorCities - Automobile National Heritage Area and its Detroit River Hub District will be able to visit sites that tell the story as to how Detroit became the auto capital. It is the Rivertown district where this can be told. This program of National Park Service will be bringing 750,000 net new visitors into Southeastern and Central Michigan within ten years. These visitors will be comprised of cultural and heritage tourists who want to see where historic events took place.

Propose Redesign of Chene Amphitheatre

The current Chene Park Amphitheatre is a significant nuisance to the Rivertown district. There are approximately only 25-30 concerts/events each year at Chene Park with many concert-goers not willing to park in the paid parking and instead parking through out the surrounding area. Lots of litter and noise are attributed to these visitors. Continuing the concert venue will have a significantly negative impact upon the redevelopment potential of the district.

Second, the parking lots for the concert venue take up nearly five blocks of prime development property that could be immediately converted to development. All of these parcels are already under City control. The lots are also located very near to one of Rivertown’s few remaining anchors, the Stroh Riverplace development. In phasing, these lots and the close proximity to the Riverplace, would be a great place to start development.

When constructed in the early 1980s, the original Chene Park amphitheatre was significantly smaller (few hundread seats) and was enlarged shortly after its completion by the Young mayoral administration to become a major venue. It has never become such.

Leave Cement Silos As Is While Enforcing Existing Environment Laws

The cement silos may be a nuisance, but they are not a major impediment to Rivertown’s redevelopment. The money that will be required to relocate the silos should be refocused on other necessary improvements in the district. Holcim, the eastern most facility, is a transfer point and most likely has remained in operation in the hopes of receiving significant funds from a relocation settlement from the City of Detroit. They are no longer using rail nor water access to their small property. The other two companies, Cemex and LaFarge, are nuisances, but they have not maintained their properties to proper air quality standards for years, probably for two reasons: 1) to save money on facilities that they plan on vacating, and 2) a dirty and dusty facility is an eyesore which encourages the government to feel that it is necessary to move these plants. If they did remain, they wouldn’t significantly impact the redevelopment of district because their traffic is almost only during daylight weekday hours. The dusty nature of their facilities could be remedied by enforcement of existing environmental laws regarding dust control.

These companies would most likely relocate on their own accord or improve their facilities if they were not under the threat of condemnation. Save the tens of millions of dollars for their relocation to be spent elsewhere in the district. Some of the savings could help fund a program to provide gap financing for new and rehabilitation development projects in the district.

Recommendation to Exert Pressure on Speculating Rivertown Property Owners.

Please include in your proposal that regular inspections of vacant and blighting properties be made. It is hoped that recalcitrant property owners may be encouraged to develop their land. One of the problems that prevented development of land to begin in Rivertown prior to the casino announcement was rampant property speculation (please see piece prepared by a Cityscape Board Member that further explains some of the other forces that hampered redevelopment in Rivertown). Frequent inspections and regular re-appraisals of properties may encourage property owners to sell, develop, or renovate their properties.

Re-Creation of Fort Detroit on the Waterfront.

Detroit was founded in 1701 and is one of oldest American cities yet there is no physical way to visually tell this important connection to our French past. How about a re-creation of the original Fort Detroit built on the waterfront? It would not only be a great tourism generating piece for the waterfront, but it would be an effective way to tell Detroit’s French heritage to tourists and residents alike.

Street Connections

During the presentation, it was mentioned that efforts would be made to reconnect Rivertown to the waterfront by creating street connections from the communities to the North (Lafayette Park, Elmwood Park and Islandview) with Rivertown. This approach does not seem feasible. The Lafayette and Elmwood Park neighborhoods are urban renewal districts which lack small connector streets like Rivertown, while the Islandview neighborhood sits across from the Uniroyal site (this is one area where the grid extension would work). Extension of the grid, similar to your firm proposed in Battery Park City in NYC, does not have much merit in the Lafayette Park and Elmwood Park neighborhoods. Most of the north south streets in the Lafayette and Elmwood Park neighborhoods already do cross Jefferson and extend down to Atwater St.

What is important is the preservation of the districts’ existing narrow streets. This characteristic should be enhanced with new construction requirements to build structures up to the property’s lot line. Most of NYC’s successful neighborhoods do not accept or encourage the use of cars, and these areas are comprised of narrow streets. It should be the same in Rivertown. To ensure that the car does on overtake the design of the streetscape, parking should be encouraged only on the edges of the district.

The residents located north of Jefferson know that the river is located just to their south. They have not made use of the amenity because for years, there was no access and the area was unappealing and even threatening. There are now parks and people are now coming down to enjoy them. Create a destination and the community will find it and use it.

Creation of View Corridors

There is no reason to create view corridors from Jefferson Ave down to the waterfront. It is over five blocks, which is too distant for view corridors.

People who travel Jefferson are transiting along the road; they are not looking for a place to go. Similar to the neighborhoods north of Jefferson, build an amenity and the residents and visitors from Jefferson will come and use the space. View corridors are not necessary for active districts like LoDo, Cleveland’s warehouse district, Soho or TriBeCa. Once developed, people find and use these amenities. Quality development and a mixture of new and rehabilitated buildings will encourage the area’s use. The word of mouth and the Detroit Metropolitan Convention and Visitor’s Bureau will tout this area.

Improper Handling of Franklin St.

In the presentation, it was mentioned that Franklin St. would need to be readjusted. What is wrong with Franklin acting as a secondary east-west spine through the district? Atwater would act as the primary district spine. The largest numbers of historic buildings are also located along Franklin, thus contributing a great deal to the character of the district. All efforts should be used to enhance this street’s character. The existing and proposed north-south streets should be the more commercial/entertainment streets while the longer east-west streets should be turned over more to residential uses.

Conclusion

We hope and expect that the suggestions and ideas that are in your final plan will be of noteworthy quality and visionary in such a way that they will be emulated far into the future. Detroit has always been a place where we have received "design hand-me-downs" from other cities across the country (i.e. Renaissance Center, relatively cookie cutter downtown stadiums, Trappers Alley Festival Market, "Monkey Bars" along Washington Blvd., etc.). This is a great opportunity to set the new standard for urban industrial redevelopment in the nation and the world. What a better place to do it than in the Motor City!

We apologize for the length of this letter. It contains many observations that have been made through our lives in Detroit. Rivertown has slowly been withering for the last decade. We firmly believe that the district can be brought back and help to make Detroit a wonderful city once again, but poor land-use decisions can no longer be afforded. If you have any questions regarding the content of this letter, please don’t hesitate to contact us by leaving a voicemail message at (313) 438-0295.

Sincerely,
Board of Directors

PS A couple Board members are concerned regarding the new name for the Rivertown district. Rivertown has some name recognition across metro Detroit and provides visual references and clues about the nature of the district while East Riverfront provides neither. Please suggest that Rivertown regain its sense of place by advocating for a name that has been in use for at least 20 years.