U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-27-2013, 05:28 PM
 
9,841 posts, read 11,450,525 times
Reputation: 2361

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I'm not even sure if this is a valid urbanity test. Bay Ridge is rather urban if you mean by density, high-ish pedestrian volume and relatively transit use. But the supermarkets are only one floor:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=super...265.98,,0,0.12

Note the lack of parking. Bay Ridge would be the densest neighborhood in DC if it was magically plopped there. It's about 6 miles from Manhattan. Here's one I found elsewhere in Brooklyn that has stuff above it:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Park+...45.85,,0,-6.34

but many don't have apartments above stores, more examples here:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/27967003-post9.html

I think supermarkets lend themselves not to having any stores about it for pest control, ventilation reasons.

My purpose for bringing up this thread was strictly for the built environment. Maintaining the streetwall. In order for cities to maintain the streetwall throughout the city, building's have to incorporate mixed use instead of one or two story massive buildings that could be used at a much higher intense use like housing too. Grocery stores in my opinion should add to urbanity instead of subtract from it. Suburban convienance like massive gorcery stores with all option's can exist in cities too if mixed with housing. That includes Big Box store's as well. Developers have to design them to add to density and urbanity though. Putting housing or office use above them is the most intense use.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-27-2013, 05:30 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 27 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,027 posts, read 102,689,903 times
Reputation: 33083
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDAllstar View Post
My purpose for bringing up this thread was strictly for the built environment. Maintaining the streetwall. In order for cities to maintain the streetwall throughout the city, building's have to incorporate mixed use instead of one or two story massive buildings that could be used at a much higher intense use like housing too. Grocery stores in my opinion should add to urbanity instead of subtract from it. Suburban convienance like massive gorcery stores with all option's can exist in cities too if mixed with housing. That includes Big Box store's as well. Developers have to design them to add to density and urbanity though. Putting housing or office use above them is the most intense use.
You should move to Denver. Big box stores all over the city, esp. on the east side.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 05:36 PM
 
9,841 posts, read 11,450,525 times
Reputation: 2361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
You should move to Denver. Big box stores all over the city, esp. on the east side.

Urban big box? I'm talking about the kind of big box store's you take the train too like we do here in D.C. They are smaller but very urban. I think D.C. was the first to build an urban Target but don't quote me on that.


Target/Best Buy/Bed Bath and Beyond/Best Buy/Marshals
Google Maps
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 05:43 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 13,126,644 times
Reputation: 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I'm not even sure if this is a valid urbanity test. Bay Ridge is rather urban if you mean by density, high-ish pedestrian volume and relatively transit use. But the supermarkets are only one floor:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=super...265.98,,0,0.12

Note the lack of parking. Bay Ridge would be the densest neighborhood in DC if it was magically plopped there. It's about 6 miles from Manhattan. Here's one I found elsewhere in Brooklyn that has stuff above it:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Park+...45.85,,0,-6.34

but many don't have apartments above stores, more examples here:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/27967003-post9.html

I think supermarkets lend themselves not to having any stores about it for pest control, ventilation reasons.
Seems like it is a test of which cities are building more TOD as of late, since it seems like most of the stores under residences are newer buildings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 05:52 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 27 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,027 posts, read 102,689,903 times
Reputation: 33083
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDAllstar View Post
Urban big box? I'm talking about the kind of big box store's you take the train too like we do here in D.C. They are smaller but very urban. I think D.C. was the first to build an urban Target but don't quote me on that.


Target/Best Buy/Bed Bath and Beyond/Best Buy/Marshals
Google Maps
They're urban, as in the city.

Target Store Locations in Denver, CO

https://www.google.com/search?q=home...w=1680&bih=904
(Some of these are not in Denver, e.g. the ones that don't have Denver addresses)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 06:06 PM
 
9,841 posts, read 11,450,525 times
Reputation: 2361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
They're urban, as in the city.

Target Store Locations in Denver, CO

https://www.google.com/search?q=home...w=1680&bih=904
(Some of these are not in Denver, e.g. the ones that don't have Denver addresses)
When I say urban, I mean no surface parking, zero lot development meaning building comes right up to the street, streetwall formed without breaks. Refer to the link above of D.C. for an example or some of the links from Chicago, NYC, or Boston.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 06:13 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,133 posts, read 20,841,272 times
Reputation: 8293
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDAllstar View Post
Very true, I think population density has alot to do with this because without enough people to shop at the stores, they are doomed to fail. It's kind of a chicken and egg problem too because people don't want to move to an area without ammenties like a grocery store, but you need to people to have a successful store. This is why I think it's a good idea to build them at the same time. It's probably the number one way to make them successful.

I don't really know much about how much this concept has caught on in cities around the nation. That's why I would be interested in hearing what cities people know of where this is already or is beginning to be prevalent. It's a great anchor for urban developments.


I would say the top five cities are:

1. New York
2. Chicago
3. Washington D.C. (will pass Chicago next year)
4. Boston
5. Philadelphia
1. New York
2. San Francisco
3. Chicago
4. Huston
5. Philadelphia

The US moved west of the Mississippi Centuries ago
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 06:14 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,992 posts, read 42,037,172 times
Reputation: 14811
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
Seems like it is a test of which cities are building more TOD as of late, since it seems like most of the stores under residences are newer buildings.
That makes more sense. Not sure if this comparison makes much sense for New York City, but I think it says something that most of the grocery stores I found in Brooklyn are one story while much of the rest of the commercial development is 3, often more stories.

For Boston, that Brookline one might be the only one with stuff above it, except maybe one in downtown (Shaw's near Back Bay?) Even South Boston's supermarket is one story:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=super...8.92,,0,-14.33

for Cambridge, the supermarkets seem like they're a bit off the most built-up corridor (Mass Ave), choosing to build in a spot less space constrained with one story buildings with surface parking (though one has garage parking instead). None are that similar to the Brooklyn ones I showed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 06:22 PM
 
9,841 posts, read 11,450,525 times
Reputation: 2361
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
That makes more sense. Not sure if this comparison makes much sense for New York City, but I think it says something that most of the grocery stores I found in Brooklyn are one story while much of the rest of the commercial development is 3, often more stories.

For Boston, that Brookline one might be the only one with stuff above it, except maybe one in downtown (Shaw's near Back Bay?) Even South Boston's supermarket is one story:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=super...8.92,,0,-14.33

for Cambridge, the supermarkets seem like they're a bit off the most built-up corridor (Mass Ave), choosing to build in a spot less space constrained with one story buildings with surface parking (though one has garage parking instead). None are that similar to the Brooklyn ones I showed.
I agree this is a new concept. Grocery stores until now have not wanted to locate in the bottom of residential buildings. Chain grocery stores were too big to locate into development that didn't purposely plan to include grocery stores. A developer would have to have a grocery store of that size in mind while designing the building. Grocery store's in the 40,000-80,000 sq. foot range can't squeeze into just any retail space on the first floor. I think you will see this in new buildings in most cities though. It's already happening. D.C. is probably just ahead of the curve because of TOD which you mentioned. All these massive mixed use building's are right above or next to metro station's.

One thing that we may have to consider is D.C.'s height restriction's may make it easier to build grocery store's this size because the footprints are so large. It leaves alot more street fronting retail space versus a highrise that goes vertical. The developer's use massive amounts of land to get 400 units in to make building's financially feasible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 06:28 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,992 posts, read 42,037,172 times
Reputation: 14811
This Manhattan supermarket is on the bottom of a housing project building:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=super...6.94,,0,-13.04

is this what you had in mind? And unsurprisingly, it's a C-Town.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top