$45M Grodfrey Hotel coming to Corktown

[DetroitSoldier]

I absolutely love reading these reports. Beside providing detail, they tend to address the questions and concerns that are usually raised by people on this forum and the general public.

In this particular case I agree with the letter relating to parking. The lack of a specific parking plan leads to questions of how much street parking the immediate area can handle, and is it a good solution? For a typical night, sure maybe it will work. But when the restaurant has 50 full tables or there is a 300 person wedding reception plus staff...no way. There has to be a better solution.

Other than that I love this project.

[Metro25]

If they dont think they need to build parking then they dont need it.

[313WX]

There is little chance of Michigan, Grand River, and Gratiot being reduced to two lanes + a turn lane in the near future. Along with Woodward, Jefferson, and Fort, they were the many access roads to downtown before the expressways. Some may even remember when the inbound lanes on Grand River were reversed in the afternoon to provide extra capacity for outbound drivers. I don't recall what year they removed the overhead directional lane indicators. Anyway, although they may have excess capacity now, they remain important alternate routes if needed.

I disagree. It's a matter of when, not if. They already did it to Jefferson, Van Dyke, East Warren, Conner and some of the wide one way streets

But yes, it's another sign of how depopulation has done a number on the city. Gratiot hasn't been at full capacity since at least the early 1970s, according to Dyes member Hermod.

[Zacha341]

^^^ The lanes of Gratiot avenue are already narrower than say Woodward.

Good times in closing off a lane - congestion will occur especially near downtown during peak hours.

[ParisianLesion]

^^^ The lanes of Gratiot avenue are already narrower than say Woodward.

Good times in closing off a lane - congestion will occur especially near downtown during peak hours.

Times they are a'changin. There is more than one or two variables at play here folks. 313 is correct in that all the major thoroughfares will be reduced and also bike lanes will be added - you don't have to do much research to discover that this is not a guess, it's literally the city's explicit strategy [[not to mention that of many major cities). This isn't going to result in congestion the way it would have in the 50s. People don't travel the same way. There seems to be more people that want to bike, ride-sharing, and more people live downtown, which is still a relatively new phenomenon. Not to mention no one drives the behemoth boats that they used to.

That's not to even get into the higher cost on municipalities for the upkeep of these huge roads, and the reduced amount of tax money that's coming in for maintaining state roads with more fuel efficient cars and young people less interested in driving. Say what you want, but you'll likely never see huge 6+ lane roads brought back to life.

[LongGone06]

Say what you want, but you'll likely never see huge 6+ lane roads brought back to life.

My earlier post had a typo. I meant to say "the main access roads," not "the many access roads."

I would love to see them narrowed to some extent. My point, however, was that I believe Gratiot, Woodward, and Grand River are considered evacuation routes. I could be completely wrong [[probably am), but I seem to remember that designation from somewhere.

[Metro25]

But yes, it's another sign of how depopulation has done a number on the city. Gratiot hasn't been at full capacity since at least the early 1970s, according to Dyes member Hermod.

lol it has nothing to do with depopulation it's called good urbanism. Cities across the country are doing road diets, New York, Chicago, Boston etc. Well at least the ones who aren't still stuck in 1960's car hell mindset like the cities down south.

[iheartthed]

Detroit's radial avenues shouldn't have been that wide in the first place.

[ABetterDetroit]

I believe Gistok is correct here. Fords plan is to have as many self driving vehicles on Michigan Avenue as they can. Optimistically, not all that long after they move their high tech people into Michigan Central. I doubt that they have any interest in being on a 2 lane road and they would have say in the matter if it was seriously taken up.

[Metro25]

I don't agree. Ford seems to fully understand the benefits of good urbanism and producing the kind of environment people want to live in, that's the whole reason they're in Detroit, nobody is excited to live in suburban Dearborn. A Michigan Avenue road diet lines in perfectly with their goals so I highly doubt they'd push back against it and they don't have final say anyway and there's a highway their cars can easily hop on.

[Danny]

Will this project happen? We have COVID-19 problem going on and our global economy in the recessional slump!!!

[313WX]

Detroit's radial avenues shouldn't have been that wide in the first place.

There was, at least, the traffic volume and population density to justify the wide roads back in the 40s - 70s.

But now, not so much.

[Metro25]

Population density has nothing to do with wide roads or is justification for such, actually the least dense cities usually have the widest roads, like Atlanta [[which is the least population dense city on earth btw). It's an urban planning mistake no matter what the density of a city is. You're really bent on putting some negative spin on good urban ideas being implemented in Detroit lol.

[casscorridor]

In addition to a road diet of one through lane in each direction, the 40mph traffic should be reduced to 25mph. Unnecessary access to side streets can also be eliminated to reduce turning and create more pedestrianized spaces. Protected bike lanes should be added, and perhaps a dedicated bus lane. So many people on here saying it's not feasible, that the capacity is needed for cars, but I doubt it would be widely missed while the aesthetic experience of the neighborhood would be vastly improved.

[LongGone06]

Population density has nothing to do with wide roads or is justification for such, actually the least dense cities usually have the widest roads, like Atlanta [[which is the least population dense city on earth btw).

The statistic about Atlanta certainly is surprising, and I'd be interested in seeing the source.

313WX's basic point is true: At one time, the traffic volumes justified the number of lanes. As I said earlier, Grand River used to have either two or three reversible center lanes to accommodate the volumes. In the morning, the lanes were inbound. In the afternoon, they were reversed for outbound traffic. That was based on necessity that began to diminish after the expressways were built. There doesn't seem to be any question that at least some of that capacity could be removed to accommodate current traffic flows.

[renf]

Popuation density for cities of 250,000 and more in 2017 from Census Bureau

Density Rank	Pop. rank	City	Per square mile	Square miles	Population
1	1	New York, N.Y.	28,492	302.64	8,622,698
2	13	San Francisco, Calif.	18,868	46.87	884,363
3	74	Jersey City, N.J.	18,306	14.79	270,753
4	21	Boston, Mass.	14,190	48.28	685,094
5	43	Miami, Fla.	12,917	35.87	463,347
6	56	Santa Ana, Calif.	12,253	27.27	334,136
7	3	Chicago, Ill.	11,934	227.63	2,716,450
8	6	Philadelphia, Pa.	11,789	134.10	1,580,863
9	69	Newark, N.J.	11,788	24.19	285,154
10	20	Washington, D.C.	11,367	61.05	693,972
11	39	Long Beach, Calif.	9,335	50.29	469,450
12	18	Seattle, Wash.	8,634	83.94	724,745
13	2	Los Angeles, Calif.	8,534	468.67	3,999,759
14	46	Minneapolis, Minn.	7,825	53.97	422,331
15	45	Oakland, Calif.	7,621	55.79	425,195
16	30	Baltimore, Md.	7,557	80.94	611,648
17	55	Anaheim, Calif.	7,073	49.84	352,497
18	80	Buffalo, N.Y.	6,404	40.38	258,612
19	31	Milwaukee, Wis.	6,194	96.12	595,351
20	62	St. Paul, Minn.	5,899	51.98	306,621
21	10	San Jose, Calif.	5,865	176.53	1,035,317
22	64	Pittsburgh, Pa.	5,462	55.37	302,407
23	75	Chula Vista, Calif.	5,450	49.63	270,471
24	35	Sacramento, Calif.	5,126	97.92	501,901
25	60	Stockton, Calif.	5,035	61.67	310,496
26	61	St. Louis, Mo.	4,985	61.91	308,626
27	51	Cleveland, Ohio	4,962	77.70	385,525
28	26	Portland, Ore.	4,855	133.43	647,805
29	23	Detroit, Mich.	4,851	138.75	673,104
30	28	Las Vegas, Nev.	4,725	135.81	641,676
31	34	Fresno, Calif.	4,711	111.96	527,438
32	19	Denver, Colo.	4,605	153.00	704,621
33	8	San Diego, Calif.	4,365	325.19	1,419,516
34	78	St. Petersburg, Fla.	4,264	61.74	263,255
35	72	Irvine, Calif.	4,197	66.11	277,453
36	48	Arlington, Texas	4,134	95.88	396,394
37	14	Columbus, Ohio	4,048	217.17	879,170
38	57	Riverside, Calif.	4,039	81.14	327,728
39	68	Plano, Texas	3,998	71.58	286,143
40	9	Dallas, Texas	3,938	340.52	1,341,075
41	83	Chandler, Ariz.	3,935	64.41	253,458
42	65	Cincinnati, Ohio	3,866	77.94	301,301
43	4	Houston, Texas	3,857	599.59	2,312,717
44	40	Omaha, Neb.	3,674	127.09	466,893
45	38	Atlanta, Ga.	3,652	133.15	486,290
46	36	Mesa, Ariz.	3,638	136.45	496,401
47	73	Toledo, Ohio	3,427	80.69	276,491
48	52	Tampa, Fla.	3,399	113.41	385,430
49	81	Madison, Wis.	3,324	76.79	255,214
50	7	San Antonio, Texas	3,280	460.93	1,511,946
51	41	Raleigh, N.C.	3,252	142.90	464,758
52	70	Lincoln, Neb.	3,195	89.11	284,736
53	11	Austin, Texas	3,191	297.90	950,715
54	5	Phoenix, Ariz.	3,147	516.70	1,626,078
55	32	Albuquerque, N.M.	2,975	187.73	558,545
56	79	Laredo, Texas	2,932	88.91	260,654
57	17	Charlotte, N.C.	2,886	297.68	859,035
58	63	Henderson, Nev.	2,808	107.73	302,539
59	71	Orlando, Fla.	2,737	102.40	280,257
60	53	Bakersfield, Calif.	2,679	142.16	380,874
61	22	El Paso, Texas	2,678	255.24	683,577
62	15	Fort Worth, Texas	2,572	339.82	874,168
63	76	Durham, N.C.	2,494	107.37	267,743
64	50	Wichita, Kan.	2,452	159.29	390,591
65	77	Fort Wayne, Ind.	2,404	110.62	265,904
66	16	Indianapolis, Ind.	2,388	361.43	863,002
67	42	Colorado Springs, Colo.	2,388	194.54	464,474
68	54	Aurora, Colo.	2,369	154.73	366,623
69	33	Tucson, Ariz.	2,363	226.71	535,677
70	49	New Orleans, La.	2,321	169.42	393,292
71	67	Greensboro, N.C.	2,294	126.52	290,222
72	82	Lubbock, Texas	2,074	122.41	253,888
73	25	Memphis, Tenn.	2,070	315.05	652,236
74	47	Tulsa, Okla.	2,042	196.75	401,800
75	58	Corpus Christi, Texas	2,027	160.61	325,605
76	29	x-Louisville	1,910	325.25	621,349
77	44	Virginia Beach, Va.	1,809	249.02	450,435
78	37	Kansas City, Mo.	1,552	314.95	488,943
79	24	y-Nashville	1,405	475.13	667,560
80	12	Jacksonville, Fla.	1,194	747.00	892,062
81	59	z-Lexington	1,135	283.65	321,959
82	27	Oklahoma City, Okla.	1,061	606.41	643,648
83	66	Anchorage, Alaska	173	1704.68	294,35

[Meddle]

313WX's basic point is true: At one time, the traffic volumes justified the number of lanes. As I said earlier, Grand River used to have either two or three reversible center lanes to accommodate the volumes. In the morning, the lanes were inbound. In the afternoon, they were reversed for outbound traffic. That was based on necessity that began to diminish after the expressways were built. There doesn't seem to be any question that at least some of that capacity could be removed to accommodate current traffic flows.

I could [[sometimes) drive GR and make better time from Telegraph to downtown than I could on either the Lodge or Jeffries.

I would leave GR as is and restore the center lane as above. Parking was time of day limited also making the curb lanes traffic lanes. I'd do the same for Michigan and Gratiot and time the lights for through flow. Narrowing wouldn't even be on the table.

[Meddle]

Popuation density for cities of 250,000 and more in 2017 from Census Bureau

Going for the record longest linear post on the site, are ya'?

Ya' know ya' cudda done a link there.

[Hypestyles]

any designs on what the rooms will look like inside?

[313WX]

The statistic about Atlanta certainly is surprising, and I'd be interested in seeing the source.

Only the highways in Atlanta are wide, and it's a very bad comparison for a couple reasons:

1. Atlanta has an extremely poor to non-existent arterial road network [[unlike Detroit).

2. Atlanta's surface streets are notoriously narrow [[unlike Detroit).

Furthermore, in Detroit's case, population density was very relevant since it was the largest and densest city in the country at the time that had no other system for mass transportation besides road transit [[unless you count the streetcar or bus, which shared capacity with automobiles). The 1.5+ million people had to get around efficiently somehow.

[Meddle]

Remember:

I-75 ... travelers want to get around/through/passed ATL as quickly as possible. I used to time my trips to hit it at 3 or 4AM and it was busy then. Traffic jams were massive and common at other times of day.

Hartsfield is one of the busiest airports in the country. That means a LOT of road traffic.

ATL metro is quite widespread which means a lot of commuter traffic.

But .... what is this thread about again?

[softailrider]

any designs on what the rooms will look like inside?

I’m sure they’ll be really nice, if that place actually gets built.

[Metro25]

The statistic about Atlanta certainly is surprising, and I'd be interested in seeing the source.

There is no city on earth that has Atlanta's urban population with a lower density. Only Charlotte and Anchorage have a lower density in the US but they're much smaller cities.

Atlanta, the world's least dense urban area with more than 4,000,000 residents,

http://www.newgeography.com/content/...form-charlotte

Post war boom cities tend to have extremely low density because they put their entire populations in exurban sprawl also Atlanta had plenty of white flight, the inner city lost like 60% of it's population.

[LongGone06]

There is no city on earth that has Atlanta's urban population with a lower density. Only Charlotte and Anchorage have a lower density in the US but they're much smaller cities.

I better understand your statement now. I was confused because you were referring to the density of "cities" such as Atlanta. The stats you're citing are for metropolitan areas that include central cities.

[Gistok]

I see no problem in going from 3 or 4 lanes in each direction down to 2 lanes + parking lane + bike lane. But going down to 1 lane, with reducing the speed to 25 MPH and no turns onto many side streets is just plane dumb.

These arterial streets are Detroit's main streets. Where much of the commercial districts are located. To try to choke them off, would be detrimental to business.