The origin of the question “The last of the urban pioneers?” came a few weeks ago as I biked down Fulton to Milano. I noticed a new sign that intrigued me.
It was in the empty lot next to Tokyo Gardens. The building that once stood there was demolished by the City of Fresno due to structural instability. The absentee owner was billed. Since then, Granville Homes purchased the site. They plan to build a mixed use development there. It a great location, next door to the iconic Tokyo Garden and near amenities such as the farmers’ market.
A preliminary design of the project was submitted for Site Plan Review with the City of Fresno on July 6th 2009. The proposal includes 4 linear buildings with exterior stairs and walkways to access 2nd and 3rd floor units. Parking is in a gated lot behind the buildings. The two buildings with Fulton frontage are anchored by commercial space on the ground floor.
While we could discuss this design in more depth there is another side of the project and Granville’s urban developments that is more intriguing. This comes from an Aggregate of what I’ve heard from associates and a conversation with Darius Assemi and Jeff Roberts when they brought a conceptual design to the Tower District Design Review Committee. They are investigating who would live downtown and how many of those people are left. It seems they are concerned that they are reaching the cap of the demographic that rents units from them at Vagabond and H Street Lofts.
A question that seems to be plaguing their minds is: are there anymore urban pioneers to rent the apartments and commercial space. With millions of dollars on the line they are rightly uncomfortable with the “if you build it, they will come” concept. They also want to know what amenities residents would want and how much they’d be willing to pay for them.
To that end Granville is gathering up input from a website and focus groups with existing Vagabond and H Street residents. Two of the residents that participated were Floyd Sanchez and Hilary Malveaux. The dialog was directed by Darius Assemi. Floyd impression of the focus group goal was to “[collect] the resident’s input on things they would like to see in a new development planned for the corner of Amador and Fulton Street.” and “They seemed receptive to specific suggestions and requests. My perception is that overall they tempered their commercial concerns with the community’s concerns well. One thing I was surprised with was the scope of their ambitions with the Amador/Fulton project (next to Tokyo Garden). They plan to do a lot with the space.”
This is further reinforced by a Fresno Bee article on July 28th that states “Almost single-handedly, Reza Assemi is rejuvenating Fresno north of Fulton Mall.” But goes on to demonstrate that downtown housing development is still a lonely path.
It’s a pretty thought, says Robin Kane, a longtime analyst of Fresno’s real estate scene. And it may unfold like that someday. But for now, he says, Uptown, even with the addition of Broadway Lofts, will remain “a niche market.”
Kane gives Assemi high marks for backbone — “he’s got the courage and innovation to do it” — and savvy — “he understands [his] market well.”
Kane says that market is in large part the younger crowd, singles or childless couples, perhaps newcomers from larger cities who yearn for a taste of what they left behind — neighborhoods near taller buildings where it’s easier to buy a painting than a lawn mower.
But, Kane says, Uptown still is too raw to lure a broad array of renters, condo-buyers and major retailers, the engine of truly dynamic inner-city redevelopment. He doesn’t explain it in so many words, but he’s talking about the middle class, that big pool of workaday folks with money and a considerable fondness for security and convenience when it comes to choosing a place to live.
For that reason, Kane says, Assemi probably is destined for a while longer to be a pioneer in Uptown development.
I drafted this post over two weeks ago. And unlike many of the other 20+ drafts I have saved, this one has become more and more relevant. With the closing of Milano on the Fulton Mall, a safe haven for Fresno Creatives for over two years, we have to question our progress. There is even the real threat of urban pioneers becoming disillusioned or even loose the faith
Downtown is not even at a point where it can support small businesses. The discussion goes back to the chicken and the egg. To live downtown, people want big city amenities. To provide big city amenities, businesses need a strong customer base. I say we need eggs by the dozen and a full hen house at the same time.
So what are your thoughts? Have we reached the cap of Downtown Pioneers willing to make sacrifices to build an urban lifestyle in Fresno? What are the hang-ups? Are there any low hanging fruit not being picked?
When will downtown become mainstream? What is that tipping point?
So readers, what is needed for you to take the plunge and move downtown? If you’re an existing resident, what will it take to keep you down there?
Intriguing post, Kiel. My first thought on the signs is that I’d like for Granville (or others) to creatively design good spaces, and then put them on the market-hoping that good/great design will attract creative pioneer types as it does in other cities. The quote about “easier to buy a painting than a lawnmower” is true, but, in almost 6 years of living Downtown, that does not appear to be changing-or even getting close to changing. It’s frustrating to hear all the talk buzzing, and attend meetings ad nauseum, and then the reality that more businesses in my neighborhood are closing than opening. Blame the economy, sure, but, as I see my old neighborhoods in LA and SF continue to reinvent themselves into urban oasis’, it’s hard to swallow in Fresno. As one of the few remaining residents in historic houses on Divisadero, it may be time to face reality, sell my house to one of the law firms (who seem to be able to purchase the historic houses in Uptown) and watch the neighborhood become a sea of stucco and faux-industrial apartments with no neighborhood amenities. It’s the little things that will keep residents downtown, and, it’s the little issues that keep lingering that drive us away.
I’d do it, but I know there’s no way I could get rent as low as than the 525 I pay to be within a 2 minute walk of Tower. In fact, I’m dreading my next rent hike considering I haven’t had a raise of any kind in the last three years. I just can’t afford whatever the rent will be in these new places. That’s the sad truth. Otherwise, to be in that area is really only a few minutes south of where I live anyway. A quick bike ride away, but alas…the money.
Last week I send my feedback into the website. But the issue is, I think, not one that housing developments can solve alone. Business is the answer (and you have your chicken/egg problem of course). Residents of the lofts (current and future) have pretty much zero options when it comes to walkable activities. Tokyo is only open, I believe, three nights per week. What choice do residents have for dining or hanging out after work except to go to Tower or further (with the exception of a few spots on Divisadero, but nothing with as much hipster appeal that it’d pull a large crowd).
Developers can make it more attractive by building cool spaces for businesses to lease, but it’s going to take a new kind of pioneer to bring business to the Cultural Arts District. We need someone like Kirk Vartarian (joking). We need someone who does focus groups asking what loft residents want in a bar or cafe. I can’t help but wonder how a place with the commitment Milano had would fare across the street from Vagabond. Would residents go there in droves every night? I don’t know. In fact, I’m just rambling now.
But on a personal note, I’m going to be looking for an apartment in the next few months. The issues making me skeptical of the CAD are, 1, the lack of historical context or really cool design of the apartment buildings, and 2 (much more important), the lack of anything else around.
P.S. Adam is right too. One of my suggestions was smaller, cheaper units (a la the archop installation).
The mantra I’ve been chanting someone else has to eventually hear. There will be no success for revitalization of Downtown Fresno business until the mobility issue is resolved.
There is a horrid lack of interest in the fundamental component of Fresno’s revitalization which is mobility. In early July Fresno COG was approached with a proposal to bring $24million in federal grant money to build a R&D facility to the old Del Monte building. COG said; it looks like this is something we can’t support because the people of Fresno are not interested.
Measure C has a $36million New Technology Transit Reserve fund that sits dormant because no one is interested in it. There has been a month worth of front page news about 9 diseased being removed from a parking lot.
There is so much to be said about this vital and important issue which can no longer afford to be ignored. All of sustainable urban development requires an alternative form of transportation because the automobile is wholy unsustainable. Even at 240 mpg with the new Chevy Volt, asphalt continues to plague the ground water and traffic causes stress.
A sustainable building does nothing for air quality from pollutants caused by unsustainable transportation. As gasoline pump prices continue to escalate there is a devistating effect on the local economy. Then, not only is the automobile environmentally unsustainable but, economically unsustainable as well. Am I the only one to understand that this area MUST enact a modern transportaiton solution for it’s growing mobility demands? It is quickly becoming an economic issue: nevermind the environmental concern. In saying this, transforming a car culture is a long process. Preperations need to take effect now with plans that can make tomorrow work. Continuing to ignore the importance of sustainable transportation is what is crazy.
When thinking about these kinds of issues I think it’s important to realize how dependent success in revitalizing downtown is on the economic success of the city as a whole. So, keeping in mind our current economic situation, I would guess that the people(like me) who would still move wouldn’t have the spending power to support good design and new businesses, but like downtown because it’s interesting and urban. The Assemi’s have pretty much gotten this market down, but it is too small to get downtown to become mainstream. For downtown to reach a tipping point it will have to attract people who are drawn there for more reasons then just because it’s different and historical. I still think the efforts of this blog and the people who care about downtown and the local government can make a big difference in the quality of development we see when Fresno’s economy turns around, but we will have to be patient if we want downtown to realize it’s potential.
when we had reza on the podcast, we talked a little about why he doesn’t live downtown and why i don’t live downtown. basically, i don’t live downtown because i love the tower district, the community it has, and the amenities that are readily available – dependably open restaurants, several bars within walking distance.
so, what would it take for me to move downtown? well, i would need some businesses. although, i have had drinks @ tokyo garden on several occasions, and have been to the lamp post as well for drinks. so, i could feasibly live downtown in one of their units, and walk to bars, and a few restaurants.
one other thing that isn’t being considered is ownership. that is, these are all zoned as condo/rentals. i bought a house a year ago. it made sense to us financially. this isn’t an option for any of these developments. it’s probably a minority of people that would want this, but it’s still an issue.
Ed’s brought up a good point about ownership – Kim and I have discussed investing in downtown should something be available along those lines. And when I say available, I also mean affordable…lofty intentions aside (that was a horrible pun, but also a slight dig at the price of the Pacific Tower lofts).
With Milano closing, I’m starting to lose faith, hence the post on the Fresnan. I’m not sure that the relative few of us interested in downtown’s success can swing the masses, and I’m less sure that this town has the political will to make the drastic changes/decisions needed to turn things around. We have people in place that can definitely make headway, but we’ve had that at several points throughout downtown’s history.
There are some very fundamental issues that need to be soved before revitalization will really take off. Current developers, investors and businesses are struggling against archaic zoning, municipal code and other rules. There are some critical infrastructure issues that also need to be solved. We also have some traffic circulation and parking issues to solve, as well as historic preservation and design guidelines that can reduce some of the energy-wasting battles.
Every every business or development is a hassle, then we are not going to achieve enough to build the momentum required. Conversely, if we streamline planniing, process and invest in infrastructure, investment, development and business will flow more easily.
We are going to make it simple to: have a rooftop bar, serve food and drink outdoors, renovate historic structures for new uses, develop live/work spaces and second floor housing.
The City has to clean this up and we are set to do this during the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan process. Our goal is to establish an entertainment district that serves the Central San Joaquin Valley. No more dance permits!
When we have a public market and outdoor dining, late night entertainment, apartments above shops, and a year-around festivals, many of us will want to live nearby. We are closer to all of this than the general public sees yet.
I’m looking at two houses in Lowell tomorrow! They cost less than my first house, which I bought in the Tower in 1983.
Craig
First thing to come to mind is ownership. I think you’re right with respect to the niche being filled with H Street and Vagabond. Now some affordable large small family type apartments that people can own.
I also think JP is on to something. The trolly existed for a reason at one point, and think there is room for the concept of mobility again.
I agree as well that the people who care about revitalizing downtown are far outweighed by the people who don’t care much. Not that they don’t care at all, it’s just that life, entertainment, shopping, for the last 30 years has had nothing to do with downtown for much of the Fresno populous. A lot of the X generation has grown up completely away from downtown. All they know is that is where you go pay your tickets.
Build me something my family can live in and own in a highrise.
I noticed there’s finally a questionnaire on the gvurban.com site. Curious to hear how other prospective renters answered….
Thanks for the update Bryan. Sadly, it think they’re really missing the mark here. With both the design options and their method for gathering input.
What should they be doing differently?
I have a take on that, Bryan. First, the survey is an example of feature-listing. Gathering information this way results in a list of features that people *say* they want (see below), but it doesn’t say anything about the design of the unit or structure. A better approach would involve participatory design sessions with potential residents drawn from a representative cross-section of the market. The result would be more holistic and design-driven, not feature-driven. (Features can come into the picture, but as part of the larger design research process, not its be all and end all.) Second, experienced market researchers know that people are notoriously bad at giving meaningful responses about what they might want in a format like a web survey or focus group. There are ways to get people to convey hopes and aspirations for future products or services, but web-based surveys aren’t it. Finally, the survey fails to attach costs to any of the specific features. Since we tend to want everything, until it has a cost attached, information gathered without associated costs is not very useful. I’d like to see Granville succeed downtown, but I’d be wary of making decisions based on this kind of data.
To quote an often quoted line “It’s the economy, stupid.” And I’m not talking about the current “Great Recession” of 2008/2009. This Valley, even before the crash, was, and still is, an economic disaster. We have an economy reliant on low paying ag jobs, low paying construction jobs and low paying service jobs. Yes, we have some nice small clusters of companies in water tech, software, manufacturing, and we should do everything we can to grow them. But at least for the foreseeable future, they’re just a drop in the bucket in terms of their regional economic impact.
What is going to be the economic engine that will drive this Valley economy? We can build 10,000 new downtown housing units – but where are all of these creative professionals going to work? Where are they going to get their disposable income which we want them to spend in all of these entertainment establishments? How much net communitywide growth in the entertainment sector can this region support? And how much of that growth can we reasonably expect to see in downtown, even with the benefits that the Specific Plan will bring? Where are the companies ready to move their corporate headquarters downtown? Downtowns are a direct reflection of the wealth of a community. While we may make some solid progress, until our regional economy is transformed, I don’t think we’ll ever be satisfied with downtown revitalization.
@Hank – Good take, makes sense!
@Joe – Lots of questions. Mighty depressing. Thanks!
This is unrelated to the topic of the original post, but i found myself needing a place to pose a question and this seems to be the best option, so here goes. Why is the Hotel Californian being used as a convalescent home? It is arguably the most attractive historic building in the city and yet I’ve never once heard that anyone is trying to do something with it. This may sound insensitive, but it should be a priority of the downtown czar to work with whoever owns the Californian to move these people and open up the hotel for better uses. I’ve heard stories about how great this place used to be for party’s and as a place to live, we should be utilizing it better!
Developers like Granville always look at the bottom line. How many units can they put on a piece of land? Or, can the planning department be shoved around just enough to get more units, less architecture, and waivers on parking and street improvements? The GV people are prolific in their sprawling of NE Fresno, and now manipulating downtown, by making the planning department their bitch, running rampid in the council chamber and on the third floor, vacating right of ways, blurring requirements for parking and street improevements, I mean, have you seen what they are building and plan on building on Fulton? If the GV people are truly stewards of their community, why would they have Mr. ‘operation rezone’ Roberts as their front man? Its about the bottom line, how much money can they make and how far can they twist city officials, not about Fresno. Need proof: Westlake in NW Freso, with two to three thousand new homes on man-made lake. Yeah, it’s about the money.
AAF, I think you’re a little off base in your criticism. First, density is a good thing, especially downtown. So the more units per acre, the better, in my opinion.
In that same vein, reducing the amount of parking required for urban housing in essential. This makes density possible and acknowledges the people with urban lifestyles drive less.
Also, Granville has made substantial investment in South East Fresno. In general, it is important to make sure your criticisms have a basis in fact. It makes them more relevant and constructive.
Well AAF was actually on base on all the facts he presented. It is unfortunate to see how quickly people have forgotten how these specific housing developers have acted in the past. And saying GV has made substantial investments in SE Fresno is a little ridiculous if you’ve driven out there, it is one of the most poorly planned parts of Fresno and you can’t put that all on the Planning Department.
I would argue that you manipulated the essence of what AAF was trying to say, which is that the media/Archop has been overly praising GV for their downtown projects, when really the quality/nature of their work still values profit over civic pride and good architecture.
Lastly, from previous Archop post’s i’ve discerned that the curator is friends with the Assemi’s, this should be disclosed.
Danny, I had no intention of manipulating what AAF was saying. There were just several statements that jumped out at me that I felt I should respond to. And those statements were being used to support opinions like: “…and now manipulating downtown, by making the planning department their bitch…” Notice that I published the comment, but it was kind of inflammatory, so I responded.
Is the history of planning in Fresno a mess? Yes. However, everything that I’ve been seeing come out of the Planning Department in the last few year is a huge leap in the right direction. The South East Growth Area is an example.
I am friends with Reza Assemi, I have disclosed this before. Though, I have never done worked for either Reza or Granville. In fact, I’ve been critical of Granville’s architecture and I have an upcoming critique of Iron Bird Lofts which I believe is an honest look at the design the good and the bad.
I’m not a fan of most the architecture that has come out of Granville. That is not a common opinion, and I have been vocal about it. If that means Reza or Granville never hire me to design one of their project, so be it. I’m more interested in the long term health of Fresno. If you don’t believe that, then you don’t know me very well yet.
My hope with archop is that we can educate the public about what good design is and push those developing in Fresno in the right direction.
GIVE Tokyo Gardens $150,000 instead of “lending” the Met $15 million.
P.S. – Times 100.
Granville is not above criticism, BUT condemning Granville for being “about the bottom line” is nonsensical. Of COURSE they’re about the bottom line – they’re a business! Downtown Fresno will remain stagnant, or in decline until developers, investors and entrepreneurs find it profitable to build or invest there. We can commission all of the studies we want, hire the best experts in the world, create the best plans, have the coolest renderings of what we want things to look like, etc – but NOTHING will happen until you can convince the people with the money that they can invest it in a project in Downtown Fresno and walk away with more of it than they started with.
AAF – Isn’t the Westlake project located at Shields and Grantland? I’d call that West Fresno, for sure. Actually, it might be outside the city limits.
Joe Moore- I don’t think AAF was so critical of GV for being about the bottom line as much as the reverential treatment they’ve been getting for building downtown, which they may or may not deserve(most likely they don’t deserve it).
Kiel- thanks for the response and I appreciate what you do on this blog. My feeling is that the development community(including local officials responsible for guiding development) have been given a pass for past grievances without doing anything worthy of redemption. I look forward to your criticism of Iron Bird Lofts, negativity has been lacking in the local’s media coverage of local development. Although it seems the Planning department has made moves in the right direction it remains to be seen if they deliver, they continue to approve overbearing Walgreens,CVS, and Rite Aid buildings without asking them to deviate significantly from their standard designs.(which other communities manage to do)
Re: Walgreens CVS and Rite Aids sprouting up all over the place:
I agree the designs are really bad, but as I understand it, unless there are design guidelines in place (and in most cases there aren’t) the planners don’t have much ground to stand on even if they want to push back on those designs.
Same for Downtown. Currently there are no design guidelines. Now as Kiel knows, guidelines themselves are not a solution, and they too have their problems. Hopefully if the Specific Plan moves forward, it will address this issue.
Also – the real solution to improved design downtown is competition. That’s the real way to raise the bar.
AAF: Rampid’s not a word. I think you meant, rampant. Furthermore, while I’m not expert on downtown, I think if GV was just about the “bottom line” they’re experienced enough and as you say “prolific” enough, which by the way is no crime, that they could find more lucrative areas to take on the downtown. Maybe, this successful family is using their influence for philanthropic reasons, as well as hoping to make a profit, and who else has the balls and resources to wade through the mess of city of fresno to make it happen? You don’t have to agree with everything they do, but to assert that it’s just to bully people and for the bottom line sounds like you have a personal bias- much like you accused Kiel of having.
I’ll comment on this again because I think it’s important.
Though AAF’s comment may be a rant, his sentiment is valid and most of the things he said have merit. Especially the bit about Jeff Roberts and the influence developers have in the council. These things are true. The history of the city proves them to be.
To me AAF’s comment reflects the sort of disgust that the general public should have towards big developers who, for most of their careers, have done things without regard for the civic good, and who now try and act like they’re positive forces in the community, without doing business, on the whole, much differently.(e.g. Westlake mentioned in AAF’s comment)
I don’t think the Granville people are especially bad, they just lack thoughtfulness in their public actions. What allows them to develop the way they do, and this goes for all large developers in this city, is a public whose attitude has been much closer to that of Lori Pollard than AAF. The public has failed to uphold it’s civic duty-to be informed and involved- just as much as developers have forgotten their’s- to think of the city’s future when they build. That’s what is so great about this site, it’s a step towards a better informed and involved public, which is exactly what we need.
* It’s a fact that a lot of the failure in fresno’s development has been because of larger forces in the state. So maybe it’s 60% our fault and 40% unavoidable.
Ok, so I’m willing to listen to another perspective. Inform me specifically about what’s happened with the development of downtown so far, that has on the whole, not been beneficial for that community? You stated, “develop the way they do”, and “pretending to act like they’re positive forces.” I feel generalizations of this nature should be backed up by something that substantiates that what’s been accomplished downtown has been such a negative force overall. Taking into account the way the city has, in my opinion, drug their feet, and impeded the development of downtown, and that not many other entrepreneurs are putting their money or necks on the line for this community, isn’t it a possibility that influence is currently a necessity for any growth when building for this particular niche? From what I understand the downtown issues cannot be compared with any other types of development in Fresno. I am very open to being educated on this matter, but I think if blanket statements are going to be made about the motives of “developers” downtown, there should be some corroborating facts that bolster that type of sweeping generalization. There are a lot of happy, creative people who live/work downtown, and love the space that’s been developed for their particular needs and interests.
Lori-
I’ll try and address your questions, it seems like you misunderstood parts of my previous comment. You ask what specifically they’ve done that hasn’t been good for downtown. I never really said their downtown development has been bad in and of itself, though I think most of these buildings won’t age well.(Iron Bird may, others not as likely) What I was saying in my previous comment was that when evaluating Granville’s work on the whole, including the thousands of tract homes they’ve built, and the thousands of homes they are planning to build (e.g. Westlake- a man made lake west of 99 that they’re planning, their downtown development just doesn’t make for it, it doesn’t even come close.
I think your a little misguided in saying that “the city has…impeded downtown development.” The city has done the exact opposite actually by waiving fees and rebuilding infrasture. Also Granville has gotten over a million dollars of public money for their downtown work. That’s ok though, the city should probably do these things for downtown’s sake. Though, when you count all the money the City has spent building infrastructure to Granville tract homes and the secondary,longer term effects of this(traffic congestion,road maintenance, air quality, culture),and the effects of the rezones they got by shady dealings, these specific developers don’t deserve one more dollar of public money.
It’s also a little upsetting that they have a guy who went to jail for bribing public officials as their VP. It just reflects a disregard for justice or any kind of guilt for wrongdoing.Though I guess they had to because he went to jail for one of the GV owners.
I see no reason why influence is a necessity to build apartment complexes downtown when that’s what the city has been rooting for for years.
Thanks for the response Lori, if my thoughts are unclear please let me know.
Danny, thank you for taking the time to explain your opinions. I can appreciate we all have different perspectives. I think I was just trying to say that this is a complex, bureaucratic and political issue, and working within this type of system is convoluted and dicey at times for all parties I’m sure. But for me, the dialogue felt much like the people who attribute Oprah Winfrey’s generosity to the hidden agenda of doing so solely for the tax write off . Call me a hopeless optimist, but I believe most people have good intentions, and at times we all have mixed motives, but that doesn’t mean that good isn’t the overriding motive and hopefully- result. And, at the expense of sounding like a chick who just returned from Tibet, I don’t feel I can ever truly know the motives in another person’s heart. I appreciate your listening.
Lori
The direction the comments have gone in an unexpected direction. This conversation is completely appropriate and I’m happy that this can be the place for this. I want to give a reminder of the original questions posted the 30 or so comments above. I invite you to revisit them and respond.
Those questions are:
Have we reached the cap of Downtown Pioneers willing to make sacrifices to build an urban lifestyle in Fresno?
What are the hang-ups? Are there any low hanging fruit not being picked?
When will downtown become mainstream? What is that tipping point?
So readers, what is needed for you to take the plunge and move downtown? If you’re an existing resident, what will it take to keep you down there?