Thoughts on Eastwood’s Palace Theater & Walgreens.
Last Night the Palace Theater was lit up in the Syracuse neighborhood of Eastwood as the mayor used the venue to give his “State of the City” address. The Palace Theater has yet to have its grand opening but it has already hosted a number of events ( a tsunami relief fundrasier for example) and has been added to the list of venues for the upcoming Syracuse International Film & Video Festival.
The Palace Theater renovation holds a lot of promise for making Eastwood a “destination” as well as a livable community. Already a number of diverse storefronts and businesses are located in Eastwood along James St. between Thompson Road and Grant Ave. The addition of the refurbished theater should elevate the whole area, showing how one project, a single building in Eastwood can positively affect the whole community. Whether or not this impact is truly palpable within Eastwood remains to be seen. We should also take note of the opposite, how a single project, building or store front, can negatively impact a place.
Nearby there is a proposal to build a Walgreens just up the road from the Palace Theater that has not made everyone happy. Within a single block of Eastwood one can see emerging two visions of community development and planning. Walgreens following a franchise model whose primary interest in a community is as a market; this model is always on the march looking to “expand” its market. The rennovation of the Palace Theater stands in stark contrast to this model and seems almost anachronistic in flavor. An independent theater built in 1924 whose owner, Frances DiBella, recently passed way has been handed down the business to hernephew, Michael Heagerty. An independent, family-owned, community oriented business; yes, indeed this is anachronistic and yet forward looking at the same time. And yet one wonders how likely it is that the Theater will survive and thrive. For instance, can we even contemplate whether DestinyUSA (if its ever built) will help or hurt this small entertainment and community venue? Does the mayor and other community leaders even ask these questions?
The concerned neighboors at Walkable Eastwood are vocalizing their concerns:
Eastwood started out as a village, and a number of its residents would like to maintain its village atmosphere. For the sake of our community’s economic, social and physical health, we encourage smart growth and pedestrian-friendly development in a walkable, sustainable community.
The Walgreens on the other hand will likely generate more jobs and possibly greater economic activity; but is this the only metric by which we measure our “values”, especially our community values? We are told that in urban combat, the struggle takes place block by block; similarly around the country communties are struggling to come to grips with the human scale of their communities against the backdrop of franchises, sprawl and other macro-economic forces. I fear I’m babbling now, so more on this later.
March 4th, 2005 at 10:30 pm
I want to quote from a recent article from the American Planning Association’s publication “Planning” of November 2004 concerning franchise prototypes and retail entitled “Rethinking Retail” by James Goodno:
“Retail and economic development
Local officials know that retail development has its limitations. Unlike manufacturing, retail does not create wealth. It distributes goods and services and redistributes personal income. Unlike tourism, retail does not necessarily bring new money into a community.
A big box retailer can have a negative effect on local revenue and jobs. If a retailer does not capture local consumer dollars currently spent outside a community or draw shoppers from elsewhere, it can hurt the earnings of local shopkeepers, eliminate better paying supermarket jobs, and shift profits to corporate headquarters and scattered shareholders”.
Trade area capture is a basic fundemental of economics. Lonnie Chu is correct in stating that it is very likely that the Walgreen proposal will at the very least eliminate as many jobs as it creates. No new money will be brought into the Eastwood neighborhood because the drug chain will be competing for the same monetary resources as six other stores located wtihin a one mile radius. Therefore, there will be no wealth created as a result of the proposal. Furthermore, the life cycle of this proposal is not economically nor environmentally sustainable should it continue to pursue a suburban type design rather than conform to neighborhood business district scale and form.
Check out my blog for more in depth urban planning coverage for local Syracuse and urban planning in general. Be sure to check out the archives. Thanks and let’s keep up the discourse on the important issues that are impacting the sustainability of Syracuse and New York State in general.
Maureen
August 28th, 2005 at 5:26 pm
Maureen A. Harding—You talk about Syracuse/Ithaca planning, sustaining Syracuse neighborhoods, promoting bike-friendly cities, etc.
I hope your job, with “airport planning” with C&S Enginners, Syracuse,
does not inhibit you from pushing, and joining the campaign for
regular Centro bus to Hancock Airport—Syracuse is the remaining U.S. city WITHOUT regular public bus
service to its “International” Hancock Airport—we should be
embarrassed, since Centro routes 22 buses daily north
on Route 11 (plus more via I81 past Airport Road, but
won’t send buses the last 1/2 to the Hancock terminal.
Austin Paulnack, coordinator,
The Accountability Project
syracusemoveon at yahoo.com
syracusemov