$45M Grodfrey Hotel coming to Corktown

**detroitbob** · April-28-20, 10:06 PM

I believe Nemo's sold the property to the developers...love is the understatement.

**casscorridor** · April-29-20, 12:13 PM

Posters on here act like Detroit hasn't lost more than half its population and these "arterial" roads aren't devoid of traffic throughout the day. There's ZERO reason why the city needs such comically wide roads. There's a ridiculous amount of excess capacity and it's nearly all dedicated to automobiles. Why not give this excess capacity over to wider sidewalks, bike lanes buses lanes, etc?

**softailrider** · April-29-20, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by casscorridor

Posters on here act like Detroit hasn't lost more than half its population and these "arterial" roads aren't devoid of traffic throughout the day. There's ZERO reason why the city needs such comically wide roads. There's a ridiculous amount of excess capacity and it's nearly all dedicated to automobiles. Why not give this excess capacity over to wider sidewalks, bike lanes buses lanes, etc?

As far as bike lanes go, I don’t see them used very often at all. As in hardly ever.

**Metro25** · April-29-20, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by softailrider

As far as bike lanes go, I don’t see them used very often at all. As in hardly ever.

Cool? Nice anecdote.

**rbdetsport** · April-29-20, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by casscorridor

Posters on here act like Detroit hasn't lost more than half its population and these "arterial" roads aren't devoid of traffic throughout the day. There's ZERO reason why the city needs such comically wide roads. There's a ridiculous amount of excess capacity and it's nearly all dedicated to automobiles. Why not give this excess capacity over to wider sidewalks, bike lanes buses lanes, etc?

So are we just supposed to assume that the city will never grow again? Are we just supposed to give up on the dream of providing transit along these corridors and creating vibrant corridors again? I understand the desire for pulling in more quality of life aspects of urban design along these corridors, but to completely change the make-up of the cities overall street grid seems way over the top to me. I'm with Gistok on these, through-and-through.

**iheartthed** · April-29-20, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by rbdetsport

So are we just supposed to assume that the city will never grow again? Are we just supposed to give up on the dream of providing transit along these corridors and creating vibrant corridors again? I understand the desire for pulling in more quality of life aspects of urban design along these corridors, but to completely change the make-up of the cities overall street grid seems way over the top to me. I'm with Gistok on these, through-and-through.

Putting those streets on a road diet can only help them to become more vibrant. Too much of it was dedicated to cars instead of people.

**313WX** · April-29-20, 01:53 PM

Originally Posted by rbdetsport

So are we just supposed to assume that the city will never grow again?

It's all but certain that's not going to happen in the foreseeable future. In fact, I would hedge my bets on the population falling below 500K before it reaches even 1 million again.

In the mean time, the city and state is wasting money that could be better used elsewhere on this infrastructure meant for 2 million people.

**Metro25** · April-29-20, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by rbdetsport

So are we just supposed to assume that the city will never grow again? Are we just supposed to give up on the dream of providing transit along these corridors and creating vibrant corridors again? I understand the desire for pulling in more quality of life aspects of urban design along these corridors, but to completely change the make-up of the cities overall street grid seems way over the top to me. I'm with Gistok on these, through-and-through.

The city is growing in the areas that we're talking about road diets though, like why do some of you seem to think road diet = less population? That's not the case, how many times does that need to be repeated? Good urban design leads to more population not less. The grid is obviously remaining in place as well, I'm not sure what you mean by that.

**Metro25** · April-29-20, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Putting those streets on a road diet can only help them to become more vibrant. Too much of it was dedicated to cars instead of people.

Exactly lol, bless you for bringing some sanity into this place. It seems this entire community here is stuck on baby boomer urban planning logic.

**LongGone06** · April-29-20, 02:30 PM

Grand River is a Michigan highway [[M-5), and it may fall within the purview of the State to decide whether to narrow it. I don't know the answer. Perhaps someone else can address that question.

**Seven&wyo** · April-29-20, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by LongGone06

Grand River is a Michigan highway [[M-5), and it may fall within the purview of the State to decide whether to narrow it. I don't know the answer. Perhaps someone else can address that question.

I don't believe so, especially considering how the city made GR in Grandmont Rosedale and Old Redford 4 lanes. It goes sidewalk, bike lane, parking lane, 2 lanes going one way and in Old Redford's case a median in the middle. I don't know if they're putting a median in the middle of Grandmont Rosedale.

**Gistok** · April-29-20, 09:03 PM

Originally Posted by softailrider

As far as bike lanes go, I don’t see them used very often at all. As in hardly ever.

Gotta agree with you there... I rarely see any bikes on the bike lanes on E. Jefferson. I would like to be proven wrong... but that would take a study to determine that... not just another opinion on this forum...

As for widening sidewalks... I would agree with that... once the current ones seem even the slightest bit crowded. Widening them and having a bike lane with fewer lanes of traffic is not some magic panacea to make the main arteries more vibrant. That's like the 1970s... when the city put canapies over sidewalks or planters nearby in some city commercial districts... that turned out to be just as big a waste of money as the tinker toys on Washington Blvd. did... funny how all that sidewalk didn't do squat [[except making businesses close up) on that roadway.

**Metro25** · April-29-20, 10:59 PM

The reality is that road-diets, bike lanes and wider sidewalks make streets and cities statistically safer and have been proven many times over to be greatly beneficial, the data is there and it's not really arguable. This is not at all comparable to the 70's 80's ped mall movement that obviously coincided with people leaving cities in America at the highest rates.

I can however offer you a million examples from all over the country of widened and expanded roads that destroyed communities, closed storefronts and made people leave their neighborhoods in droves.

**401don** · May-08-20, 08:06 AM

I'm wondering how many hotels with fold. Cities rely on business, tourists and conventions. None of the 3 are coming back anytime soon.

**Honky Tonk** · May-08-20, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by 401don

I'm wondering how many hotels with fold. Cities rely on business, tourists and conventions. None of the 3 are coming back anytime soon.

I don't think development is going to come to a screaming hault, but I do think investors might be cautious until they get a feel for the climate, if and when the virus subsides. The big money guys, of course, won't be effected as badly.

**ABetterDetroit** · May-08-20, 09:23 AM

Originally Posted by Metro25

The reality is that road-diets, bike lanes and wider sidewalks make streets and cities statistically safer and have been proven many times over to be greatly beneficial, the data is there and it's not really arguable. This is not at all comparable to the 70's 80's ped mall movement that obviously coincided with people leaving cities in America at the highest rates.

I can however offer you a million examples from all over the country of widened and expanded roads that destroyed communities, closed storefronts and made people leave their neighborhoods in droves.

Ok, I will bite. Please give me one example where the property values are so low and the taxes cycle up sky high on all new construction and good ‘urban planning’ has solved the problem?

The construction gap is what’s choking the life out of Detroit more than anything else. Capital must be obtained in order to grow anything. New jobs, housing, restoration and preservation, the list is endless. Loans have to make sense to build new or improve. If the State of Michigan and Detroit refuse to close the construction gap in urban areas when interest rates are at historic lows Detroit’s problem will continue.

Once the investments in property starts at scale then the money for quality urban planning becomes available. You cannot put the horse behind the cart no matter how badly you want to.

**casscorridor** · May-08-20, 11:25 AM

Originally Posted by rbdetsport

So are we just supposed to assume that the city will never grow again? Are we just supposed to give up on the dream of providing transit along these corridors and creating vibrant corridors again? I understand the desire for pulling in more quality of life aspects of urban design along these corridors, but to completely change the make-up of the cities overall street grid seems way over the top to me. I'm with Gistok on these, through-and-through.

Yes, you should give up delusions of grandeur and accept that Detroit is a mid-tier city now, and unlikely to grow significantly anytime soon. The utmost priority should be improving life for existing residents. There are many complaints of unsafe walking conditions from residents who rely on the bus network, or the many young people who walk to school. Let's make the city safer, easier and more comfortable to get around without a car. That means, in some areas, road diets that are proven to make streets safer and a high quality, frequent and reliable bus service.

**Metro25** · May-08-20, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by casscorridor

Yes, you should give up delusions of grandeur and accept that Detroit is a mid-tier city now

This is obviously nonsense, Detroit is still very much one of the major cities in the US and a massive important population center.

**Gistok** · May-08-20, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by casscorridor

Yes, you should give up delusions of grandeur and accept that Detroit is a mid-tier city now, and unlikely to grow significantly anytime soon. The utmost priority should be improving life for existing residents. There are many complaints of unsafe walking conditions from residents who rely on the bus network, or the many young people who walk to school. Let's make the city safer, easier and more comfortable to get around without a car. That means, in some areas, road diets that are proven to make streets safer and a high quality, frequent and reliable bus service.

You'll have to take that up with the Gilberts, Fords, Cummings, and other businessmen, and foundations such as the Skillman, Kresge, Wilson, etc, who don't share your "lowered expectations"...

I don't disagree with the needs of the city's residents... but not by giving up some of the great projects that have improved the city and made downtown just a ghost of its' former abandoned self.

**softailrider** · May-08-20, 09:08 PM

Originally Posted by 401don

I'm wondering how many hotels with fold. Cities rely on business, tourists and conventions. None of the 3 are coming back anytime soon.

I’ve been wondering the same thing. Maybe mothball some of these places until the economy comes around. Not sure what other choice there may be.

**Metro25** · May-09-20, 10:04 AM

Why would they mothball when most of these hotels wont be open until 2022 at the earliest? Well after corona is over.

**401don** · May-09-20, 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by Metro25

Why would they mothball when most of these hotels wont be open until 2022 at the earliest? Well after corona is over.

I'm talking about existing hotels in Detroit, and elsewhere for that matter.
I didn't suggest mothballing, however having some hotels mothballed might be preferable to having all hotels trying to compete with very low occupancy.

**softailrider** · May-09-20, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by Metro25

Why would they mothball when most of these hotels wont be open until 2022 at the earliest? Well after corona is over.

Maybe mothball is the wrong choice of words, but 2022 is 18 months away, if a hotel is going to be empty for that long, some type of action has to be taken. Not exactly sure what, but you got to some things.

**Honky Tonk** · May-09-20, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by 401don

I'm talking about existing hotels in Detroit, and elsewhere for that matter.
I didn't suggest mothballing, however having some hotels mothballed might be preferable to having all hotels trying to compete with very low occupancy.

Don't worry, taxpayers will bail them out.

**iheartthed** · May-09-20, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by 401don

I'm wondering how many hotels with fold. Cities rely on business, tourists and conventions. None of the 3 are coming back anytime soon.

I think business travel will rebound as soon as there is some sort of solution, but the convention biz is going to be tough. The more traditional cities for conventions [[Las Vegas, Miami, NYC, Chicago, etc.) will be fighting for every dollar, and they already have the infrastructure that large conventions prefer. I'm not sure how Detroit makes the case there, but the good news is that Detroit's hotels are probably sustained more on business travel than conventions.