My talk with Mayor Russell.

Had a fairly long talk with Mayor Russell yesterday. Her main point was that I needed to keep an open mind to the possibilities, to which I answered I thought that ingenuous--as if to say, by being opposed I was automatically unwilling to listen to reason. I mean, it's a reasonable stance for her to take, but I've done enough research and had enough experience downtown to come to a conclusion.

The one thing that seems to really open her eyes was when I told her how well I was doing, even compared to a few years ago. "Downtown is killing it," I insisted. "You can see why I don't want to change things."

Got asked to go on TV again, but this time declined. Tom at Dudley's seems to be taking the lead right now, getting his customers to email the council, though I fear that he's taking the DBBA's assurances that they're backing off a little too seriously.

Anyway, good for Sally Russell and Andrew Broadman for willing to talk to me about it.

I hope they come to the right decision.

 

Another study about pedestrian malls, this one by a local.

 

Received an email from Kristen Stilton, a recent transplant to Redmond, as follows:

Hoping this finds its way to Duncan McGeary…..

I am a recent transplant to Redmond, via Boise, but from So Cal.  When I was on the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission in Huntington Beach, CA, years ago, I wrote the attached which was published in the Orange County Register.

In my opinion, Minnesota Avenue is not currently set up for a successful pedestrian Mall.  It mainly lacks anchor draws on both sides (dead ending at Wall Street).  This can spell disaster if the street is close, in my opinion.

Feel free to write me back here if you wish to discuss how you can parse/use some of these facts into your narrative (I have been remote for 10 years)

 

To have or not to have a Pedestrian Mall at Huntington Beach Main Street...

As a concerned Huntington Beach resident and patron of downtown shops and restaurants, and as a resident within walking distance of the pier and Main Street, I am a proponent of enhancing and improving this downtown experience. As a California licensed landscape architect whose final thesis project at UC Davis discussed pedestrian-only thoroughfares and transportation issues for parts of the city of Berkeley, I might have more than a fleeting perspective of whether a street closure mall on Main Street is a viable solution for us.

Opinions, comments, facts, and fiction abound concerning this local topic. Like many, I have enjoyed and appreciated the Third Street mall in Santa Monica. However, I am also aware of completely failed projects where much time and effort and money is now being used to re-open closed roadways. In the 70s, cities jumped on the “closed-streets-pedestrian-mall” bus like it was going to pass them by. Proper studies were not done for many projects which have resulted in blighted or deteriorating downtowns. Many of the hundreds of pedestrian malls of that era and prior have since failed. Some of these include: 14th Street Mall, St. Louis; Franklin Street Mall, Tampa; AND, touted as the first pedestrian mall in the country in 1959, Kalamazoo Mall, Michigan. As well, there have been some success stories. These include: Pearl Street Mall, Boulder; 16th Street Mall, Denver; Third Street Mall, Santa Monica; State Street Mall, Madison Wisconsin.

When researching success of pedestrian malls, one invariably ends up reading of something in Europe (Essen, Bonn, Cologne, Hamburg in Germany, Copenhagen in Denmark, London). European tradition and culture embrace a historical design vernacular that generally excluded or minimized vehicles. We are not Europe. We do not have the history and infrastructure that de- emphasizes the automobile. We would need to address shortcomings here. For us to mimic design success, we need to be fully cognizant of expected user behavior versus realistic behavior based upon our national and local culture, attitude and impressions, and existing structure/design. Design is not a stand-alone element of attraction, and the time-weary phrase “form follows function” applies here. Function includes: what do people really WANT to do, what WILL they do, where WILL they walk and shop. The bucolic street experience that people may envision will not happen through forced features and design.

Instead of pushing through a concept that sounds good superficially, has anyone generated a list of the issues we “think” a pedestrian mall would solve, or experiences we think are lacking? Perhaps this mall idea is not the way to solve them. Perhaps the same effort and money could be applied differently more efficiently. What about Huntington Beach’s citizens and merchants? Downtown’s shop owners and restaurateurs, especially, need to fully supportive of ANY initiative to move forward with this concept. So far, they have voiced their concerns, and I have yet to see the concerns fully addressed. How can you assure them their revenues will increase through this change? Trial closure has been bandied about like it would solve everything and prove something. The only true test of success of such a mall would be if someone could compare participation levels, visitors, and spending habits of patrons on both a “non-closed” day, and the same day (climate, season, etc) but “fully-built-out.” This is impossible. To those who think a temporary bollard closure will immediately change usage patterns (read: spending/visiting), I say you may be very disappointed in the results. How much money would be required to actually improve the experience, even temporarily? What should the measurements of success be, and who is going to do this analysis objectively?

When the pros and cons and history are understood, and still a majority of local merchants, citizens, and politicians embrace the thought of moving forward, then the next undertaking is to work on the basic elements that are required for success, and what we are lacking. This is not a one-step project. Moving forward with such a proposal needs to be viewed as a long-term commitment involving money, time, phased construction, re-evaluation and on-going monitoring. The promise up front needs to be one to make this succeed.

Some consistent elements in successful pedestrian malls include:

• Size – usually 2 to 6 blocks. We meet this.

• Focus, draw, attraction – like in an enclosed mall, you must have anchor attractions at

  either end and, ideally, “a hub” to support all in the middle. I don’t think we meet this. The pier, as a draw, is not balanced by anything as significant at the other side of the Main Street proposed closure. A potential problem is a triangulation of traffic from the pier to The Strand to Pacific City, alienating the businesses near the post office. This is already a reality to some extent.

• Plentiful parking at the periphery of “the mall” – ideally, this would be free or low cost. We lack this. This could also be the balance attraction to the pier.

• Connector streets and walkways from “the hub” to parking and other further attractions such as Strand and Pacific City – we fall short here. The pedestrian experience is ended by busy streets, cars, intersections. We would need to be able to extend the experience to the connector locations.

• Diversity of shops and eateries and experience – we have a beach-themed environment and surf-based shops here. Can we add some family draw? Entertainment?

• Transportation addressed – bus hubs, taxi drop-offs, car pool parking, shuttles. We should consider options.

• Ongoing Maintenance and Revitalization – we would need to revisit and revise the mall regularly as society changes, as most of the successful malls undergo occasional re- design and upgrades.

  Common trends in the failed malls include:

• Bad parking

• Exposure to weather, or sense of exposure

• Inefficient circulation

• Loss of or lack of tenant draws

• Perceived or real increase in crime

• Lighting issues

• Safety issues

• Lack of shopping diversity.

• If we were to think of our California and local culture, we could certainly add to this

  potential problem list: conflict of bikes/skateboards/pedestrians, litter issues, graffiti, lack of family-oriented destinations within the proposed mall.

  To have or not to have a pedestrian mall? The answer to the initial question is simply not easy. A decision will be made to either move forward or not in designing a street-closure mall. Let’s hope the decision is fully researched both from a design and financial standpoint and that everyone is cognizant of both best and worst-case scenarios, with contingency plans in place on all fronts.

 

They're back!

Another article in the Bulletin today about what they called "a plaza." Says there was "mixed reaction" to the proposal, which I think is an understatement. No news that the Downtowners have delayed the proposal.

It almost doesn't matter, because they'll be back. It's very clear to me that the city management is all for the proposal. I suspect the city council will be inclined to listen to them, sadly.

When you bring up the failure rate of pedestrian malls, these "experts" answer is that is different this time, that they know what they're doing. But closing the streets and adding landscaping was the same in the past as it will be in the future. No one had explained why it's different this time. I guess they're smarter than the guys who did it before?

Actually, there is a huge contradiction in their approach. What's "different" this time is that plan a constant series of events. (Which hurt business--no one seems to deny this anymore)

When I pointed this out, they more or less denied it. Which I thought was a little devious--of course they'll use the plaza--for Everything.

I still think it's more likely than not they'll do this. I'm going to be talking to Sally Russell today, as much as I can (I'll be working at the store.) All we can do is try.

 

Why are Marvel and DC acting in ways that from my perspective seem suicidal? I have some ideas.

Simply put, their "new" corporate overlords (AT&T and Disney) can't understand why comics don't sell better. It must be because comics aren't promoted correctly, comics aren't somehow reaching the right people, that those of us that distribute and sell comics aren't doing our jobs correctly. 

See they compare the box office totals to the DC and Marvel movies and--well, there is no comparison. It's like comparing the juniper tree in front of my house to a Sequoia in Yosemite. It doesn't compute. There must be something wrong.

The same thing happened about 25 years ago. Marvel decided that the system was broken and by God, they were going to show us how it was done. They bought a comic distributor and proceeded to sell their own comics.

It was a complete and utter disaster. Two thirds of all comics shops went out of business, dozens of publishers, and all but one comic wholesaler were destroyed. Marvel itself went bankrupt.

So here we go again, down the same road. DC and Marvel feed the speculators, who are a very unreliable bunch of customers, and readers drift away and sales decline and--in a panic--DC and Marvel decide to pull out of the current system and show us how it's done.

I suspect we'll see similar results.

Penguin Random House will promote Marvel comics like they have never been promoted before--and it probably won't make any difference. Look, if billion dollar movies, hit TV shows, young adult graphic novels, and toys and games and....every other kind  of Super-Hero paraphernalia you can think of haven't significantly budged the needle, all of PRH's emails promoting the "Top 100" comics isn't going to either.

Look, I used to think differently. I thought for instance that the Spider-man movie would sell Spider-man comics until nothing happened. I thought the huge upsurge in selling Watchmen or the 300 or Sin City GNs would turn into something. Instead, once the movies came out, sales actually dropped for a time. Walking Dead? Sold a bunch of the graphic novels but once the show was over...crickets.  

Comics as comics just aren't a significant part of our culture. The IDEA of comics--that's a whole 'nother story. I will bet you anything that there are millions more people who wear superhero T-shirts than who actually read comics. Who buy the toys and the video games--and hundreds of millions of people who watch the movies and TV shows. 

Oh, occasionally someone will drift in and ask for a Scarlet Witch comic, and believe me, that's only because of the TV show, but we're talking--in my store--half a dozen people? Maybe?

If you want to condemn me for being pessimistic, I can understand why. Just realize that I would be so very happy, thrilled, to be wrong.

I don't have to call the local bookstores and ask if they are going to carry comic books now that PRH has them--I'm pretty sure that Sunriver Books, and Roundabout, and Dudley's aren't going to touch them. Graphic novels, maybe, but they can already do that. 

So if they aren't going to sell them, where is the advantage? How does hurting the business who actually likes comics and is interested in selling comics help? 

It's self-destructive, I tell you, and I'm insulating myself from the damage that's coming.

The Market stays irrational.

We still get daily calls about whether we sell or buy sports cards. We haven't done that for...let's see...about 20 years. I guess once the info is online for doing something you're online forever. 

My experience with sports cards was so unpleasant that you'd have to shoot me--and the behavior of some of the people who call only reinforces that feeling. ("What are they worth?" I don't know, sir. I haven't done it for twenty years...."Then where to I sell them?" I really don't know, like I said..."Who is selling them?" Uh, how do I say this, I HAVEN'T DONE IT FOR TWENTY YEARS! "Well, you don't have to be an asshole.")

Anyway, even before I quit sports cards much of the chatter about the industry was foreign to me--but I still could understand most of what they were talking about. Then a few years later, it was all completely Greek to me. I had no more idea what's happening to sports cards than I would, say, a diesel engine manufacturer. Not a friggin' clue.

Also about 20 years ago we shifted to a "reading" model of comic store. That is, once the speculators washed out of the comic industry, we still had a core group of customers who were readers, who bought comics because they enjoyed the stories and art. So we catered to readers--carrying graphic novels was one good way to do that, especially as back issue sales declined. 

But comic readers were never enough to completely keep us in business, either before the speculative boom of the mid-90s (thus, us carrying sports cards) or after the bust (thus us carrying Magic, board games, toys.)

Then, about five years ago the market started to shift again. There was still the core group of reading customers--but the industry started catering more and more to speculators, until today--I'm starting to get the same feeling of not understanding what the industry is doing anymore. 

I decided to shift even more decisively toward new books and games, and that turns out to have been a good decision. We are doing better than ever, overall.

But the comic biz is going through a huge amount of turmoil right now. No one knows what's going to happen. The Big Two--DC and Marvel--have moved to new distributors, which puts everyone else in jeopardy, increasing the time, money, and energy we have to devote to ordering and receiving weekly shipments.

In the meantime, much of the chatter is about the speculative value of comics for which I care not one fig. It's rather dismaying to read my fellow comic retailers talking about ratios of incentives for special covers, variants of comics that have nothing to do with the contents, errors on the cover, and outrageous pricing online for comics that came out yesterday. We've done this before and it didn't turn out well. But I get the distinct impression I'm in the minority.

As John Maynard Keynes said about the stock market: "The stock market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent."

As I said, we are doing amazingly well, so I can watch this process with a certain distance, shaking my head, and hoping everyone comes to their senses. It's a very weird feeling to do something for 40 years and realize the market has completely shifted. 

And to be making more money than ever. Weird.

Project delayed.

Apparently, they've delayed the project to turn Minnesota into a pedestrian mall. This is good news--but I'm not sure I totally trust it. I think they'll be back when the furor dies down. Lots of big plans for downtown...most of which seem unrealistic to me, but most of which will probably happen after I'm no longer a downtowner. 

Anyway, success? I'm a little surprised we were able to stop it.

 "After the feedback from our stakeholders on Friday morning, I have been directed by the DBBA board to create a presentation for the City Council that recommends extensive R&D before taking any action on Minnesota Ave, but immediate progress towards restrooms in downtown (on their own)." 

I think this will be framed as a failure in communication. Instead of, the plan sucked. 

Went to the Downtowner presentation this morning.

It was every bit as unpleasant an experience as I feared. I pretty much turned people against me. The crowd was overwhelmingly in favor of the proposal, which was presented in Utopian, happy-talk terms.

Apparently, the early meeting had gone the other way. Tom and Jeff took me aside as I arrived and told me what had happened. It felt good to have them on my side.

But inside the room during my hour, it turned out much differently. Linda and Trish tried to assure me that it hadn't gone wrong, but no one was meeting my eyes, which is a really bad sign. No one came up to say they agreed with me. 

Yeah, I probably didn't help my case.

But I kind of know this about myself. I come on too strong, don't know when to shut it. 

Anyway, I think I'm done. I'll talk to Mayor Russell on Sunday, tell her to be aware that despite what the Downtowners may tell her that there is significant opposition to the idea.

And leave it at that.

As Trish said, "You've only been in business in downtown Bend for 37 years. Why would they listen to you?"

37 years of listening to business owners come in without a lick of common sense who then go out of business. 37 years of newcomers telling me how it should be. Why do you insist in coming and changing what already works? Why come from somewhere else only to change it to the same thing you left?

37 years of working around the problems created by the Downtowners. 37 years of going my own way, of opening on Sundays when no one opened on Sundays, of being opposed the ever-expanding special events that hurt business, 37 years of fighting them, trying to keep them from permanently closing the streets. 37 years of realizing I have no influence and I'd better protect my business from their stupidity. 37 years of telling the downtowners they need to find ways for minimum wage, half time employees to afford parking. 37 years of always paying significantly above minimum wage to keep good employees.

37 years of looking at what actually happens, not what some book says. 37 years of people telling me that somewhere else does it better only to learn that the person who does it better is no longer in business. 37 years of building my business steadily until my 37th years was my best ever (even with being closed two months for Covid) and of having my 38 year turning out even better. 

And despite that, despite the huge numbers of customers and tourists downtown, the business who aren't apparently doing well (many of them who are still not open on Sundays and Mondays) are going to do a Hail Mary pass despite ample evidence it's a risk. 37 years of having the restaurants dictate what happens downtown despite having almost no similarities to my business.

So I will being doing my 38th, and 39th years, and so on, on my own, working around their decisions, ignoring their pie-in-the-sky plans and just doing my thing. Again.