Mid-day street life in the CBD.

[DetroitPlanner]

Gilbert has had a positive impact on the street life of downtown. From pianos, to chess pieces to food carts to bike share and street furniture.

What has been your favorite, or least favorite? I can't picture another City currently doing as much to create life. Can you? If so, what city is it?

[royce]

After an afternoon Tigers' game, my nephew and I played Connect Four, Jenga, and Chess. It was fun playing with the giant pieces. So, I'd have say that's been my favorite.

[sumas]

I always delight in positive movement regarding our city. I have certainly shared frustrations regarding it, but always refocus on the really good things happening. Thanks for sharing fun stuff.

[DetroitPlanner]

I have always thought that having street life is the most important ingredient to having a vibrant downtown; even more important than making sure that the streetwalls are preserved. After all, You only have things like the big games in places where the buildings were set-back, allowing for interaction.

William H Whyte and Roberta Gratz have documented these sorts of things very well in their studies. In case you have never heard of them, read them. They provide an interesting perspective.

[Mackinaw]

I have always thought that having street life is the most important ingredient to having a vibrant downtown; even more important than making sure that the streetwalls are preserved. After all, You only have things like the big games in places where the buildings were set-back, allowing for interaction.

William H Whyte and Roberta Gratz have documented these sorts of things very well in their studies. In case you have never heard of them, read them. They provide an interesting perspective.

I agree with the notion that street life is more important than the pure aesthetics of street walls, but I disagree that the former is somehow sacrificed or not optimized due to the retention of street walls. The fact is, you simply need some kind of gathering space, it need not be spacious. Look at how much activity occurs on the narrow sidewalks of SoHo/Greenwich Village. Look at all the street life in NY or in European cities like Rome. The streets and sidewalks, complete with their unbroken street walls, are conduits pockmarked by occasional activity generators of their own [[like street cafes and street dining), and the 'fun stuff' occurs in piazzas and parks jut down the lane. Detroit's streets and sidewalks are plenty wide to support activity notwithstanding the street wall, plus Detroit has well located parks large and small: CMP, GCP, Hart, Cadillac Square. I have no concern about Detroit having enough 'public activity space' such that all of the empty lots downtown can and should be developed with absolutely zero setback.

A related concern, and perhaps more profitable discussion, surrounds the mix of amenities offered in the CBD retail spaces. I worry that it's getting a bit too monolithic with coffee and sandwich shops-- I hate running the risk of really ensconcing ourselves in a 9-5 sort of regime. The new 24/7 gym is good, as is the talk of a couple new legit restaurants that will stay open late on Merchant's Row, and the downtown branch of Baker's Keyboard. But, as a general matter, we need more retail diversity: a department store [[ideally with evening and weekend hours), and more of anything open past 6pm. Bottom line: activity is generated from diversity and people, not the availability of space to roam, which may in fact be counterproductive or at least irrelevant.

[nain rouge]

The fact is, you simply need some kind of gathering space, it need not be spacious. Look at how much activity occurs on the narrow sidewalks of SoHo/Greenwich Village. The streets and sidewalks, complete with their unbroken street walls, are conduits pockmarked by occasional activity generators of their own [[like street cafes and street dining), and the 'fun stuff' occurs in piazzas and parks jut down the lane.

See, but I don't think that's what they're trying to create in downtown Detroit. The hope, it seems, is to create some sort of "Times Square" entertainment district. The thinking evidently being that 24/7 endless materialistic entertainment is the key to getting people to move back to the city. A normal urban neighborhood? Not on the radar for downtown, far as I can tell.

The current approach rings hollow, in my opinion, and has nothing to do with creating a true urban city. A more apt term for the intended end result of such planning efforts is a "theme park". A reals city fulfills a necessary purpose. The Detroit we see emerging from the ashes fails on that measure. It's all about petty personal lifestyle preferences. Who supports light rail because they don't want to drive home drunk from the bar? It's so stupid. And yet we see people say stuff like that routinely.

By focusing so maniacally on downtown entertainment districts in the Midwest, we're putting the cart way before the horse.

[Detroitnerd]

Dan squeezes the city, like so many lemons.

You buy his lemonade and thank him for it.

[Hermod]

All of these people didn't go downtown for pub-crawling.

Attachment 23880

[Detroitnerd]

All of these people didn't go downtown for pub-crawling.

Attachment 23880

And yet downtown probably had more pubs and taverns then ...

[mwilbert]

See, but I don't think that's what they're trying to create in downtown Detroit. The hope, it seems, is to create some sort of "Times Square" entertainment district. The thinking evidently being that 24/7 endless materialistic entertainment is the key to getting people to move back to the city. A normal urban neighborhood? Not on the radar for downtown, far as I can tell.

The current approach rings hollow, in my opinion, and has nothing to do with creating a true urban city. A more apt term for the intended end result of such planning efforts is a "theme park". A reals city fulfills a necessary purpose. The Detroit we see emerging from the ashes fails on that measure. It's all about petty personal lifestyle preferences. Who supports light rail because they don't want to drive home drunk from the bar? It's so stupid. And yet we see people say stuff like that routinely.

By focusing so maniacally on downtown entertainment districts in the Midwest, we're putting the cart way before the horse.

I don't think you are looking at this properly. Yes, there is [[or at least should be) more to an urban area than entertainment, but I don't see creating a theme park as being the goal here, but rather as a means to a goal. In my opinion, what downtown needs more than anything else is residents. Only people living there can provide ongoing demand for services which can then serve visitors and employees. Then you can get into a virtuous cycle, where the available amenities make the area more attractive for residents and employers. But first you have to attract residents, and what other than "lifestyle preferences", petty or not, is going to make people want to live downtown?

That isn't to say I think this will necessarily work, although I think it has some chance. But I don't know of an alternative. Note also that I don't think this approach is a substitute for the city getting its house in order in other ways, but to be really effective I think you need to both reduce the reasons not to live in the city, and increase the reasons to do so. Whether you agree with their approaches to this problem, it seems to me that both Gilbert and Duggan clearly see this.

[ismoakrack]

A normal urban neighborhood? Not on the radar for downtown, far as I can tell.


Downtown is not a normal urban neighborhood. It shouldn't be built as one.

[nain rouge]

Downtown is not a normal urban neighborhood. It shouldn't be built as one.

When there's no town left to go with the down part, maybe there needs to be a rethinking of what downtown should accomplish. We're not an NYC that's just missing its Times Square.

OK, say we make a "vibrant" Midwest downtown, a glorified corporate campus with a handful of hulking, expensive entertainment amenities. Chicago did it and that city is a bigger mess than ever. Look at the murders on July 4th weekend. Indianapolis did it and the neighborhoods around downtown are still wondering when they'll be trickled down on. Unigov was a tremendous band-aid, but a permanent fix is still wanting. It's a stalling tactic at best.

In fact, most Midwestern downtowns are a rejection of traditional principles of urbanism. It's unsustainable vainglory.

In Greektown, for example, we see the shell of a former downtown urban neighborhood. And to me, it represents the sort of development we should be striving for if we want a return to true urbanism. Or do you prefer 1 Campus Martius and Greektown Casino?

[DetroitPlanner]

In Greektown, for example, we see the shell of a former downtown urban neighborhood. And to me, it represents the sort of development we should be striving for if we want a return to true urbanism. Or do you prefer 1 Campus Martius and Greektown Casino?

Got it..... We should strive for shells of former neighborhoods. Anything else?

[nain rouge]

Got it..... We should strive for shells of former neighborhoods. Anything else?

Oh, brother. You know what I meant. The area around Greektown was decimated by urban renewal. Obviously, it doesn't work as good in isolation. But for a long time, it was the successful, beating heart of a thriving community. Even now, it's a lot better off than most of downtown.

[nain rouge]

I think a big part of the problem with downtown redevelopment is that planners are seemingly convinced that if rich smart people want it, it must be the right thing to do. But rich smart people once wanted freeways cut through the heart of urban neighborhoods. Rich smart people wanted endless suburbs. Some rich smart people still want exurbs.

Are they always right?

[313WX]

I think a big part of the problem with downtown redevelopment is that planners are seemingly convinced that if rich smart people want it, it must be the right thing to do. But rich smart people once wanted freeways cut through the heart of urban neighborhoods. Rich smart wanted suburbs. Some rich smart people still want exurbs.

Are they always right?

No, but unfortunately there's the matter of the golden rule...

[nain rouge]

No, but unfortunately there's the matter of the golden rule...

Yeah, urban renewal really followed that rule. Suburbanites would be thrilled to be displaced by freeway developments. "Well, remember the golden rule!"

[DetroitPlanner]

Oh, brother. You know what I meant. The area around Greektown was decimated by urban renewal. Obviously, it doesn't work as good in isolation. But for a long time, it was the successful, beating heart of a thriving community. Even now, it's a lot better off than most of downtown.[/COLOR]

Of course I knew what you meant. How you wrote was a bit comical. That is what the was for!

[nain rouge]

Yeah, it did sound weird. One of those statements that could only make sense when talking about Detroit or, worse, Toledo.

I'll also qualify myself by saying that I think Gilbert has a decent chance of being successful. It's just my belief that it won't mark the rebirth of Detroit, but rather the completion of an urban theme park.

[Scottathew]

My favorite thing downtown is still Campus Martius.

My least favorite part is "the beach". I have no desire to get sand on my clothes\shoes\socks, nor did I bring a spares.

Once or twice a year I take my wife's class [[high school special education) on a downtown tour. They really liked the outdoor games. I took them into the Guardian Building and they were amazed by what they saw.

I know there's a long way to go, but the difference between now and five years ago is amazing. The next step is to get more people living down here and all the supporting businesses that will follow.

[DetroitPlanner]

I think a big part of the problem with downtown redevelopment is that planners are seemingly convinced that if rich smart people want it, it must be the right thing to do. But rich smart people once wanted freeways cut through the heart of urban neighborhoods. Rich smart people wanted endless suburbs. Some rich smart people still want exurbs.

Are they always right?

Got it. We must fight Dan Gilbert because he is rich. Therefore he knows nothing. Man I am adding a lot to my planner's work book today!

You're ignoring the role of NEPA. This comes into play with nearly every large infrastructure project. Hey there are a lot of poor folks living in the exurbs too. Ever go to Pinckney?

Ultimately the planner has little power. Planners to not set policy, politicians do. If planners fight the politicians they get canned. We are also there to get poop thrown at us and be told we are stupid by the public. It is a very emasculating job at times. It requires a thick skin and a look to making incremental changes that will result in the big picture. If you have talked to a planner and he is full of BS then he does not know his role or is trying to make himself out to be something he is not. Planners do learn how different people react to different things, and use it to your advantage too in pushing your own goals, policies, and whatever you can to serve the best interests of your constituency.

I see things like the private sector [[mainly Gilbert's) role in this thread's topic as being refreshing. He has taken the bull by the horns and does stuff to encourage downtown to be lively. Yes it is in his own self interest, but hey we are all along for the ride. I also see things like how he was able to pull off a bike share program in weeks using his own money as opposed to the years it has taken Ann Arbor and U of M to do the same thing using federal and local tax dollars.

There are physical aspects of planning, but that is nowhere near as important as the economic or social aspects of planning. We all want to live somewhere where we can have a good chance at making a decent living, have dependable bus service for those who need it, safe neighborhoods and parks. Sometimes we get bogged down in physical design changes we forget about people. I am still trying to figure out how so much brutalist designs were built in the late 60's and 70's [[RenCen, Boston City Hall, Countless University Libraries, and to a certain extent Hart Plaza come to mind).

[nain rouge]

DetroitPlanner, I just want you to answer two questions, I guess. Which do you like better: Greektown or One Campus Matrius? And would you rather have a plaza on Cadillac Square or a complete street wall of mixed use buildings?

[DetroitPlanner]

DetroitPlanner, I just want you to answer two questions, I guess. Which do you like better: Greektown or One Campus Matrius? And would you rather have a plaza on Cadillac Square or a complete street wall of mixed use buildings?

I like both. When I was a kid, I have plans for the Compuware site I drew up that had better access, a bigger tower, and not such an unsightly parking garage. It also had a lot more retail, but that was 30 years ago when there was a lot more retail downtown so it seemed realistic, and as a kid I was optimistic. I liked Trapper's Alley, but the size and vertical nature of the building was its downfall. It could not keep tennants on the upper floors. Those should have been reserved for a different use. I liked Greektown pre-Trapper's Alley when there were a lot of privately run third places [[coffee shops, bakeries, video game parlors [[hey it was the 80's)). I am concerned about it now that it is controlled only a few families; with one being by far dominant and tearing up the place for un-needed skyways.

Cadillac Square I like it now better than when it was a bus depot. I miss the ham places, one of which is now a parking lot. I am not convinced a plaza is needed there. It is true that many downtowns built plazas in the 1960's that copied what Victor Gruen did to save Kalamazoo, but nearly every one of those was a disaster. They were also the focal point of their downtown, which Cadillac Square isn't. Cadillac Square is more of a complimentary space. What is going on there these days is driving me batty. Paving good roads for basketball courts, painting over the courts. Makes me wonder who is pulling the string and paying for it. I've not seen a bill or an official plan.

[nain rouge]

Interesting responses!

As far as malls go, I've noticed that urban pedestrian malls are most successful in mediumish college towns. Kalamazoo's mall has been doing OK since it's been downsized, as it was a bit too ambitious. Charlottesville, VA [[home of University of Virginia) has a tremendously successful mall in its downtown. The key is that it both have a captive audience of college students without cars, and the core area is small enough that most students can walk to the mall or take the bus in a reasonable amount of time.

Urban pedestrian malls in bigger cities that depend on people to drive to it from hither and tither are doomed to failure, because the suburban competition is infinitely more convenient for drivers. Circle Centre in Indy shows the struggles of a mall in a big city downtown [[though it's an indoor mall). Essentially, it's two floors too big. They way overestimated demand.

[ABetterDetroit]

Does the River-walk count? Every time we spend time on it I am blow away that they pulled that off and how nice it came out. Last week I read the entire donors list and it was shocking how many of the corporate sponsors went into bankruptcy or are just plain out of business now.