Here is a list of cities with and without traditional department stores. This is just off of the top of my head so make any corrections as needed.

 

MSA’s > 1,000,000

 

Cities with downtown department stores:

 

Boston

New York

Philadelphia

Norfolk

Miami

Pittsburgh

Cincinnati

Kansas City

St. Louis

Minneapolis

Dallas

Portland

Seattle

Los Angeles

Houston

Chicago

San Francisco

Milwaukee

New Orleans

San Antonio

Washigton

Indianapolis

Sacramento

San Diego

Salt Lake City

 

Cities without downtown department stores:

 

Cleveland

Columbus

Baltimore

Denver

Detroit

Phoenix

Tampa

Orlando

San Jose

Charlotte

Austin

Nashville

Memphis

Louisville

Oklahoma City

Richmond

Hartford

Raleigh

Buffalo

Birmingham

Atlanta

Jacksonville

Rochester

^ You can add Atlanta to the list without one. They have department stores, but none in the Central Business District.

 

Also, Washington DC and Indianapolis have department stores downtown. Salt Lake City has 2 new stores (Macy's, Nordstrom) at their City Creek development. Neither is in the traditional sense (its part of a quasi-lifestyle center) but they are in the CBD.

Haha, weird list idea.

 

I'm surprised Indy doesn't have any.

 

Edit: Or maybe it does, according to Mwd711.

What are we counting as a "department store?"  Indy has a TJ Maxx.

I wonder how many of those department stores are subsidized

I think Denver has something like that [EDIT, referring to a TJ Maxx] too.

What are we counting as a "department store?"  Indy has a TJ Maxx.

Traditional

Haha, weird list idea.

 

I'm surprised Indy doesn't have any.

 

Edit: Or maybe it does, according to Mwd711.

 

There's one left at Circle Centre. Carson Pirie Scott. It takes up part of the old L.S. Ayers store.

 

 

Not sure what that means but I would define the term a little more broadly.  Are we excluding chains like TJ Maxx because they don't sell appliances?  For this purpose, I'm not sure we should.  I certainly wouldn't say the role of a TJ Maxx or a Burlington is filled by existing options in downtown Cleveland, which is what I mean by "this purpose."

Pittsburgh subsidized multiple downtown department stores: a lord and taylor, a brand new lazarus, and offered tax breaks to saks to stay open. All in the early 2000s. All three are now closed. It doesn't work unless there is a market.

 

Most downtown departmet stores are closing, miami, all of those in pittsburgh, columbus--it just isnt how we shop any more.

They closed the headquarters (offices) for Macy's in downtown Miami but as far as I know there are no plans to close the store.

^^I have never thought of either of those places as a department store (or anything to jump up and down about either).

Quite a few of these cities also have large malls within 2-3 miles of downtown also, so having another location downtown would be repetetive and unnecessary.

I think off price stores are up for debate. The thing is when people think of downtown department stores, they think of full line relatively upscale stores. Off price department stores are usually  much smaller and don't usually fit what people envision as a downtown store or even a department store in some cases. That said, I'm not sure there's too many downtowns that only have an off-price store without a traditional store too. It seems like you need that anchor to draw people and stores and the traditional ones do just that.

I would consider Macy's and Nordstrom at Horton Plaza in San Diego pretty much in the heart of Downtown.

Quite a few of these cities also have large malls within 2-3 miles of downtown also, so having another location downtown would be repetetive and unnecessary.

 

That's very true. The thing is its usually the downtown store that moved out to the mall, leaving a void in the CBD. That's especially true in smaller markets.

A traditional department store to me a store that you see anchoring malls, such as Dillards, Macys, JcPenny, Sears, Saks Fifth, and Nordstrom.

 

TJ Maxx is a store that anchors a strip center.

Not sure what that means but I would define the term a little more broadly.  Are we excluding chains like TJ Maxx because they don't sell appliances?  For this purpose, I'm not sure we should.  I certainly wouldn't say the role of a TJ Maxx or a Burlington is filled by existing options in downtown Cleveland, which is what I mean by "this purpose."

Traditional = Macy's, Nordstrom, Saks, Dillard's, Neiman Marcus, Belk, etc. TJ Maxx, Marshall's, Burlington are more like discount stores.

I agree that the discount chains are arguable, but I would still argue for their inclusion because they fill a huge void that's otherwise unfilled.  Not a Nordstrom-sized or Nordstrom-shaped void, but still clearly a void.  And I agree that TJ Maxx typically anchors a strip center instead of a mall... but wouldn't it be nice to add a strip center worth of stores to downtown Cleveland?  Is a downtown with a TJ Maxx not better off than a downtown with no such stores at all?  I can't believe that's even a real question.

Is a downtown with a TJ Maxx not better off than a downtown with no such stores at all?

 

It is better off with a TJ Maxx, but this discussion and thread is about downtown department stores. Downtown Cleveland would be better off with several retail stores but this isnt about that. Its a discussion about department stores.

If we're taking stock of which downtowns have one and which don't, shouldn't they all count?  What's the point of doing such a comparison if a place with a Burlington and/or a TJ Maxx equals a place with nothing of the sort?  Functionally, there's a much bigger difference between those and zero, than between those and Penney's.

I agree that the discount chains are arguable, but I would still argue for their inclusion because they fill a huge void that's otherwise unfilled.  Not a Nordstrom-sized or Nordstrom-shaped void, but still clearly a void.  And I agree that TJ Maxx typically anchors a strip center instead of a mall... but wouldn't it be nice to add a strip center worth of stores to downtown Cleveland?  Is a downtown with a TJ Maxx not better off than a downtown with no such stores at all?  I can't believe that's even a real question.

 

I think the question being probed is whether a "Nordstrom-shaped void" exists, rather than whether a downtown with a large clothing+ store is better off than one without.

 

I think the subsidy question is a very good one (which of these stores are (not) subsidized). I'd be interested to know, if anyone can answer that.

 

Honestly, I don't think we should fret the departure of these too much. Their square-foot economic impact must be pretty small, even when they are thriving. Not that they aren't a plus and don't make downtowns more livable.

If we're taking stock of which downtowns have one and which don't, shouldn't they all count?  What's the point of doing such a comparison if a place with a Burlington and/or a TJ Maxx equals a place with nothing of the sort?  Functionally, there's a much bigger difference between those and zero, than between those and Penney's.

 

Maybe we need a third category. I'm not sure where you stop including things as department stores, though, if you start broadening the field.

 

I don't know if the point is to say something fundamental about these cities so much as it is to note that the cities with were able to retain a relic. More an analysis of curiosity than a state of affairs.

I would suggest that their square-foot economic impact is massive, since they determine what can and can't be accomplished in day-to-day urban living.  How car-free can you be?  Not much, if your basic needs can't be met anywhere near your home.  A city with retail and a city without are two different animals. 

If we're taking stock of which downtowns have one and which don't, shouldn't they all count?  What's the point of doing such a comparison if a place with a Burlington and/or a TJ Maxx equals a place with nothing of the sort?  Functionally, there's a much bigger difference between those and zero, than between those and Penney's.

If you would like to add which have discount stores, please do. I do not know which cities have these type of stores downtown and which don't. I know downtown Miami has TJ Maxx, Ross, and Marshall's.

Cincinnati has a Macy's downtown directly across from Fountain Square.  We are the headquarters for Macy's after all.

^Is it profitable?

I don't know if Cincy's DT Macy's is subsidized, but we also have a DT Sak's (which is subsidized, but just re-upped their lease), and a TJMaxx.

Both Cincy stores are subsidized according to <a href="http://www.jsonline.com/business/downtown-boston-store-bucks-nationwide-trend-f73el2t-135840243.html">this article.</a> It also mentions subsidies in Pittsburgh, Indy and Milwaukee.  <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2009/10/26/daily39.html?page=all">I also found this about the St. Louis Macy's.</a> Apparently, they were working on getting a TIF for it but I can't find it was approved or not.

 

<a href="http://www.twincities.com/stpaul/ci_20427035/st-paul-macys-store-close-sundays-staff-up"> There's also this story about the St. Paul Macy's cutting hours. </a> It mentions that the store received a $6 million loan in 2001 back when it was a Dayton's.

 

Norfolk's Macarthur Center was heavily subsidized by the city. The city paid $33 million to build the Nordstrom there <a href="http://www.norfolkdevelopment.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=133&Itemid=183"> for a grand contribution of $90 mil. </a> Ironically, Macarthur Center is now struggling and losing many tenants, even though its still fairly new.  I would venture to say that almost every department store that has an urban mall attached to it has probably gotten subsidies of some kind to help support it or develop the neighborhood.

Thanks..... to be clear, I think they are worthy of subsidies given the overall impact.  However, I think it speaks volumes about a central business districts retail consumer base if a department store can be profitable without subsidies

Thanks..... to be clear, I think they are worthy of subsidies given the overall impact.  However, I think it speaks volumes about a central business districts retail consumer base if a department store can be profitable without subsidies

 

I dont see their impact. How is Macys in Downtown Pittsburgh helping? The area surrounding it isnt in the best shape and the store itself isnt that nice. Also, as I said earlier, Downtown Pittsburgh isn't filled will great retailers. It doesnt appear that their Macys is having any great impact on their downtown.

Re: the subsidy question, I'm pretty sure most if not all of these stores are subsidized in some way. 

 

My point in bringing it up was that Cleveland would need such a program in order to join this club, and then we started discussing different levels of club membership.  I'm not sure how constructive that is, if it requires us to equate having a TJ Maxx with having nothing.  Everyone seems to agree that there is a substantial and meaningful difference.

 

If "discount stores" are counted, then the list of comparable cities having nothing is rather small, compared to the list of comparable cities that have at least one downtown establishment to fill this role.  Once we accept that we're on the wrong list, the question stops being "what kind of store is such & such" and starts being "how do we solve this."  I don't believe the second question can be answered without subsidies, but I also don't believe Cleveland has properly accounted for the cost of inaction.     

Putting aside that this thread is not Cleveland specific, you are lacking the specifics to make an informed argument here.  There would have to be a question of how MUCH subsidy a department store would want/demand to locate within Cleveland's CBD..... especially given how Higbee's folded (even after all the subsidizing we did to put that store in a prime position to succeed.  You also don't know that City leaders have not reached out to various retailers about bringing a store to downtown only to recieve lukewarm interest in return.  Point being, you don't know that "we" haven't already accepted that we are on the wrong list.  Moreover, I don't know how you quantify the "cost of inaction" on this topic.  Personally, if we are talking about subsidizing a TJ Maxx or KMart downtown.... I think the cost of action would be one of those situations in which the juice ain't worth the squeeze.

 

Personally, I would much rather favor subsidizing walkable outdoor shopping and local businesses which visitors won't find in the suburb/exurb/rural area/or other city they drove in from than another drop in the hat Macy's.

Thanks..... to be clear, I think they are worthy of subsidies given the overall impact.  However, I think it speaks volumes about a central business districts retail consumer base if a department store can be profitable without subsidies

 

I dont see their impact. How is Macys in Downtown Pittsburgh helping? The area surrounding it isnt in the best shape and the store itself isnt that nice. Also, as I said earlier, Downtown Pittsburgh isn't filled will great retailers. It doesnt appear that their Macys is having any great impact on their downtown.

 

Pittsburgh as a whole isn't trashed and abandoned like Cleveland.  The impact of a fully functional downtown is seen throughout the city.  Changes what it means to live there... determines what you can and can't do without leaving town... affects the value of every home.  Distance to everyday shopping is a pretty common decision factor in evaluating places to live.  If you're considering moving 5 miles closer to your downtown, are you moving 5 miles further from everyday shopping, or are you not?  Night and day difference. 

now this is a traditional department store!

MARX TUNES 4, 'SING WHILE YOU SELL' GROUCHO IN THE BIG STORE

^^Your overexaggeration is starting to reach a 'breathtaking' level

 

 

^I don't know...I think it was pretty much reached upthread when he stated a downtown TJ Maxx and Burlington would "transform" downtown Cleveland.

 

Edit:  Actually I think he stated this in the Tower City thread.

Thanks..... to be clear, I think they are worthy of subsidies given the overall impact.  However, I think it speaks volumes about a central business districts retail consumer base if a department store can be profitable without subsidies

 

I dont see their impact. How is Macys in Downtown Pittsburgh helping? The area surrounding it isnt in the best shape and the store itself isnt that nice. Also, as I said earlier, Downtown Pittsburgh isn't filled will great retailers. It doesnt appear that their Macys is having any great impact on their downtown.

 

Pittsburgh as a whole isn't trashed and abandoned like Cleveland.  The impact of a fully functional downtown is seen throughout the city.  Changes what it means to live there... determines what you can and can't do without leaving town... affects the value of every home.  Distance to everyday shopping is a pretty common decision factor in evaluating places to live.  If you're considering moving 5 miles closer to your downtown, are you moving 5 miles further from everyday shopping, or are you not?  Night and day difference. 

 

Just like your perception vs reality. 

^^Your overexaggeration is starting to reach a 'breathtaking' level

 

How so?  Is Pittsburgh's building stock not in notably better condition?  Does a city's available retail not determine what you can and can't do without leaving town?  Is nearby shopping not a key decision factor in selecting a residence, particularly in a metropolitan area?  Pretty sure all these statements are demonstrably true. 

 

One might argue causation, but I'm not seeing that from you.  I'm seeing ad hominem snark, which as usual leads to more ad hominem snark, which as usual means this discussion was fun while it lasted.

Thanks..... to be clear, I think they are worthy of subsidies given the overall impact.  However, I think it speaks volumes about a central business districts retail consumer base if a department store can be profitable without subsidies

 

I dont see their impact. How is Macys in Downtown Pittsburgh helping? The area surrounding it isnt in the best shape and the store itself isnt that nice. Also, as I said earlier, Downtown Pittsburgh isn't filled will great retailers. It doesnt appear that their Macys is having any great impact on their downtown.

 

Pittsburgh as a whole isn't trashed and abandoned like Cleveland.  The impact of a fully functional downtown is seen throughout the city.  Changes what it means to live there... determines what you can and can't do without leaving town... affects the value of every home.  Distance to everyday shopping is a pretty common decision factor in evaluating places to live.  If you're considering moving 5 miles closer to your downtown, are you moving 5 miles further from everyday shopping, or are you not?  Night and day difference. 

 

The most vibrant parts of the Burgh (at least in my opinion) aren't near Macy's. In general, that neighborhood is pretty dingy. I'll go to Shadyside over the clock any day of the week to do my shopping there. Shadyside doesn't have a department store, but I think most people consider it more attractive and trendier than downtown. Just look at the difference in the stores that are in Shadyside and compare it to the Golden triangle area. Its no contest.

 

Just to finish off on subsidies, sometimes its worth it, sometimes it isn't. I pointed out MacArthur Center because what's happened there is somewhat similar to what's happened at Tower City. MC is losing tenants left and right. Its losing its cache as a destination and as an upscale mall. All the subsidies in the world aren't helping it as long as the shoppers avoid it. Hard to say if that $90 mil was worth it when it starts to empty out only a few years later. Clearly, the market can't support it for various reasons. TC was heavily subsidized to get built in the first place. I'm not sure why you say Cleveland didn't make an effort to subsidize retail. TC was their attempt at it. Like in Norfolk, the good times didn't last.

 

In my Googling, I found <a href="http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2000/04/23/loc_nordstrom_price_tag.html">this interesting article from 2000.</a> It talks about how Cincy offered $50 mil to lure Nordstrom. It also mentions that as of then, Saks and Fountain Place had received well over $100 million in various subsides and loans. I'm sure that number has only grown as time has gone on. I also found that back in 1998, <a href="http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-4450772.html"> Macy's wanted $55 mil </a> to build a store on State St. in Chicago. The city rejected it. Makes you wonder what would've happened to Field's if that went through.

Mwd711, thank you for your contributions, and thanks also to Florida Guy for the OP. 

 

I would distinguish TC construction from the sort of subsidies I'm talking about, since Higbee's was already there.  As for the Pittsburgh Macy's vibrancy radius... I don't think it works like that.  The operative radius is the one between major retail and any given house.  That radius is much shorter in Pittsburgh than in Cleveland.  I would suggest it's a big factor in why Shadyside doesn't look like Glenville, why Mt. Washington doesn't look like Mt. Pleasant.

^^Your overexaggeration is starting to reach a 'breathtaking' level

 

How so?  Is Pittsburgh's building stock not in notably better condition?  Does a city's available retail not determine what you can and can't do without leaving town?  Is nearby shopping not a key decision factor in selecting a residence, particularly in a metropolitan area?  Pretty sure all these statements are demonstrably true. 

 

One might argue causation, but I'm not seeing that from you.  I'm seeing ad hominem snark, which as usual leads to more ad hominem snark, which as usual means this discussion was fun while it lasted.

 

Agreed we should stay away from ad hominem attacks, but saying someone's argument is an exaggeration doesn't qualify, as he is still making an attack on your statement, not on you personally.  It would be ad-hominem if he says that "327 is a serial exaggerator, don't listen to any of his statements."

 

I would also agree that your statement is a "breathtaking" exaggeration.  Certainly not all of Cleveland is in the horrible condition you describe, nor is Pittsburgh lacking significant quantities of same.  The cities have different geographies, demographics and histories, and I think you're more likely to find the answers for what difference there is between the two by exploring those things than by attributing it to downtown department stores.  The biggest difference imo is that many of Pittsburgh's most affluent areas (their equivalent of the Heights or Lakewood) are in city limits, whereas in Cleveland they are in a separate municipality.  Conversely, many of their poorest areas are small industrial suburbs.

^^I agree with you about the scope of the impact- that it's bigger than looking just at the blocks around the department store.  I think the indirect amenity value of downtown retail for residents of downtown and nearby neighborhoods would be significant.  A major downside to living in central Cleveland now is that you have to jump in your car to buy almost everything other than food and dress shirts.

327, you make some valid points, but having a Dillard's in TC didn't seem to help the neighborhoods near downtown. I would argue those places (Ohio City, Cudell, etc.) are doing much better now than they did when Dillard's was still open for business. I don't think one department store makes much of a difference. Pittsburgh threw subsidy after subsidy at stores and it never got much in return. Just in the past year, it lost two more high profile downtown retailers (Saks & Staples). I don't think Bakery Square/E. Liberty (Target & Whole Foods) or the Southside Works developments were contingent on Macy's being across the river, especially since that store has been absolutely butchered. If anything, those places are competition and part of the reason that downtown Pitt has lost its retail mojo. I'm not sure there's much reason for a person to go downtown to shop when those other places are cleaner and offer better shopping.

 

Shadyside, etc. are solid neighborhoods and that's why stores are located there. Are they solid because of proximity to Downtown? Perhaps, but I'm not sure a department store is the number one reason for it. Obviously, having a department store is a plus but many people feel like traditional department stores are passé and out of style. I think that shows in how many have gone under, not just in the cities, but in suburbs too.

Of the list Florida Guy put of Downtowns Without Department Stores, these cities actually do have downtown department stores (and I'm not talkin' TJ Maxx or Ross):

 

Indianapolis - Carson Pirie Scott 

San Diego - Macy's, Nordstrom

Sacramento - Macy's (2; Men's and Women's)

Salt Lake City - Nordstrom, Macy's

Washington DC - Macy's (at a Metro station to boot!)

^^I don't think it's causal, but for the sake of accuracy, a vast majority of the City of Cleveland is doing substantially worse now than when Dillards was downtown...

 

I agree though that focusing on department stores in particular is a little arbitrary.

Straphanger, that's true. But I don't think people live in Shadyside because of Macy's being downtown. That's my overall point. They live in Shadyside because its a great neighborhood. Just like people have moved into Tremont, etc, because they are becoming great neighborhoods. The fact that Dillard's left downtown has not stopped these neighborhoods from improving and people from moving in. As more people move in, the retail will improve.

The Macy's downtown apparently still pulls in some sort of business. I drop in every few months at different times, and while it's not booming, it does brisk business. With PNC filling the gap of Mellon Bank/Old Lord And Taylor, the new PNC skyscraper, and the rather quick redevelopment of Saks, things may just keep swinging up. The major parts of the CBD that have done well have been concentrated by the Cultural District and Market Square, and it is slowly spreading toward that area.

 

I also agree that Burlington/TJMaxx/Marshalls are in a class all its own...Burlington anchors the former Gimbels down the street and it's ALWAYS busy- and it's a 3 story store! Granted, the East Busway buses run right in front of the store, which probably contributes to that, but still.

I always forget how hardcore TJ Maxx fans are.

haha maxxinistas?

hey... I love me some TJMaxx...