Was Gratiot closed at Woodward in the 80s/90s?

[Khorasaurus]

This picture:



seems to show a sidewalk along Woodward running continuously across Gratiot, blocking Gratiot traffic from continuing onto State or turning onto Woodward. Is that correct? When was that sidewalk in place, and why? Was it part of the Woodward transit mall?

[mtburb]

Yes. The road dead-ended at a very small parking lot halfway between Woodward and Farmer and the rest of the way to Woodward was just a big sidewalk. State Street ended the same way across Woodward.

It wasn't until 2001 that both streets were re-extended to intersect with Woodward.

[EastsideAl]

Yes on all counts. As part of the 'malling' of Woodward, the Woodward/Gratiot/State corner was turned into a carless plaza. Gratiot was cut off with a dead end after Farmer at the truck entrance in the middle of Hudsons. I'm not quite sure where the cut off on State was, but I remember walking past the newly-vacant Kresge's store on the pedestrian walkway.

It was part of the plan to make downtown more "pedestrian-friendly" for shoppers, which was behind the building of the Woodward and Washington Blvd. malls. The Gratiot-State crossing was probably the least busy one on Woodward, easily bypassed by traffic, and was at the point where Hudsons would meet the new Cadillac Center Mall that was to be built just across Gratiot on the old Kern Block [[it never was built, of course, and Compuware is there today), so it kind of made sense.

[Khorasaurus]

It was part of the plan to make downtown more "pedestrian-friendly" for shoppers, which was behind the building of the Woodward and Washington Blvd. malls. The Gratiot-State crossing was probably the least busy one on Woodward, easily bypassed by traffic, and was at the point where Hudsons would meet the new Cadillac Center Mall that was to be built just across Gratiot on the old Kern Block [[it never was built, of course, and Compuware is there today), so it kind of made sense.

Interesting. Of course, by the time the picture I posted was taken, Hudson's was vacant, the Cadillac Center idea was dead, Compuware was still years away, and the awkward little pedestrian "plaza" was sitting empty.

These ideas always sound good on paper, but very few pedestrian malls have actually worked in reality. Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, Battle Creek, Jackson, and Detroit have all pulled them out and seen upticks in commercial activity once cars return.

[iheartthed]

Interesting. Of course, by the time the picture I posted was taken, Hudson's was vacant, the Cadillac Center idea was dead, Compuware was still years away, and the awkward little pedestrian "plaza" was sitting empty.

These ideas always sound good on paper, but very few pedestrian malls have actually worked in reality. Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, Battle Creek, Jackson, and Detroit have all pulled them out and seen upticks in commercial activity once cars return.

The pedestrian plaza wasn't the reason that the area declined. It was in decline long before the pedestrian plaza was built. Removing it had nothing to do with the revival either, other than it being a casualty of the new investment/interest.

Fulton Mall in Brooklyn is also a pedestrian mall that went into severe decline around the same period that downtown Detroit declined. It remained a pedestrian mall and is going through a revival now because Brooklyn in general is very hot.

[Khorasaurus]

The pedestrian plaza wasn't the reason that the area declined. It was in decline long before the pedestrian plaza was built. Removing it had nothing to do with the revival either, other than it being a casualty of the new investment/interest.

Fulton Mall in Brooklyn is also a pedestrian mall that went into severe decline around the same period that downtown Detroit declined. It remained a pedestrian mall and is going through a revival now because Brooklyn in general is very hot.

Yes and no. Downtown Detroit retail declined for a number of reasons, but cutting off automobile traffic from driving past [[and parking in front of) the storefronts certainly didn't help. If people don't drive down a street, they won't ever know what retailers are there.

The only way pedestrian malls work is if you have a ton of existing pedestrian traffic [[like New York has in places) or a major anchor that acts as a destination. When Detroit had Hudson's, it had those conditions. But just as it lost the conditions, it installed a pedestrian mall [[or similar idea..."transit" mall) which just accelerated the decline.

I like the current configuration of Woodward in that area, especially with the new streetcars, although I think it needs more on-street parking.

[iheartthed]

Yes and no. Downtown Detroit retail declined for a number of reasons, but cutting off automobile traffic from driving past [[and parking in front of) the storefronts certainly didn't help. If people don't drive down a street, they won't ever know what retailers are there.

The only way pedestrian malls work is if you have a ton of existing pedestrian traffic [[like New York has in places) or a major anchor that acts as a destination. When Detroit had Hudson's, it had those conditions. But just as it lost the conditions, it installed a pedestrian mall [[or similar idea..."transit" mall) which just accelerated the decline.

I like the current configuration of Woodward in that area, especially with the new streetcars, although I think it needs more on-street parking.

The pedestrian mall only affected one corner of downtown Detroit. What happened to the rest of downtown, or the city for that matter? Grand River and Greenfield suffered a worse fate than Woodward and Gratiot. This corner of downtown didn't suffer a more dramatic deterioration than other parts of the city. I find it hard to believe that the pedestrian mall was much of a factor at all.

Again, I bring up Fulton mall because it did indeed decline and also rebounded without changing the set up of being a pedestrian mall. That it is a pedestrian mall probably has nothing to do with either its success or failure.

I guess I could follow your argument if you said that places that propose these pedestrian malls tend to have other factors which make it hard for urban shopping districts to be successful. New York happens to be a place where urban shopping districts have remained viable. If that is what you are saying then I agree.

[royce]

Yes and no. Downtown Detroit retail declined for a number of reasons, but cutting off automobile traffic from driving past [[and parking in front of) the storefronts certainly didn't help. If people don't drive down a street, they won't ever know what retailers are there.

The only way pedestrian malls work is if you have a ton of existing pedestrian traffic [[like New York has in places) or a major anchor that acts as a destination. When Detroit had Hudson's, it had those conditions. But just as it lost the conditions, it installed a pedestrian mall [[or similar idea..."transit" mall) which just accelerated the decline.

I like the current configuration of Woodward in that area, especially with the new streetcars, although I think it needs more on-street parking.

Agreed. BTW, one thing that I have always wondered about, regarding the fate of the downtown Hudson's store is: if Hudson's had built a 6-10 story parking deck on the Kern Block site that connected to the store and offered free validated parking, would the store still have closed when it did or would it have remained opened longer, attracting mall customers to come back to the flagship store because it offered free parking just like the malls?

[bust]

I also read The Death and Life of Great American Cities. I even have a copy handy. Jacobs presents her opinion on this matter in detail in Chapter 18: "Erosion of Cities or Attrition of Automobiles".

She argues that the infrastructure that supports car traffic [[freeways, parking lots, wide streets, etc.) erodes cities by thinning the density of their downtowns, making cities less convenient, less compact, less lively, and less safe. And by diminishing the healthy diversity of downtowns, automobile infrastructure reduces the reasons to use them, which perpetuates a vicious cycle. She points to Los Angeles as the most egregious example, and in the same sentence writes Detroit is almost as bad [[p. 351).

Her well-known solution is to encourage mixed uses in diverse human-scaled architecture concentrated among small blocks convenient for pedestrians. And yes she strongly advocates for public transportation. She argues convenient transportation alternatives to cars are needed that do not require so much space, do not dilute density, and don't divide and destroy the urban fabric.

In fact as early as on page 4, in her introduction, she writes that expressways "eviscerate great cities."