Gsgeorge Member Username: Gsgeorge
Post Number: 2 Registered: 08-2006 Posted From: 141.211.173.238
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 3:40 pm: | |
Hello everybody. I work at the University of Michigan map library and came across a fascinating pamphlet from (I'm guessing, no date is printed) the 50s or 60s. This item is not found in our database of library holdings, so you're the first to see it. The pamphlet is titled "Dynamic Detroit Plans to Become Beautiful Again", and it outlines the massive Urban Renewal project which, as many of you know, only partially saw the light of day. The text and sketches are fascinating, and totally shocking--no wonder our beautiful city is in such sorry shape. A fascinating document of the times and of the narrow-minded way of thinking during the era of Urban Renewal. The full resolution image can be seen on my flickr page (just click the link in the description to read it full size). Comments, questions? I'd love to pinpoint the year from which this originates... Keep an eye out for my future posts--more Detroit maps and pamphlets forthcoming! Detroit Plans to Become Beautiful Again! ----- The pamphlet does propose one (but only one) good change to Detroit: "Detroit's principal shopping district along Woodward map look like this several years from now. Planners here, as in some other metropolitan areas, envision the future downtown shopping section as a pleasant place of tree-lined pedestrain malls that would be closed to all motor traffic. Such traffic would be routed around the area or carried beneath it." If only they had done that first before spending all the money to knock down our neighborhoods and construct housing projects.... (Message edited by gsgeorge on August 08, 2006) (Message edited by gsgeorge on August 08, 2006) (Message edited by gsgeorge on August 08, 2006) |
Ray1936 Member Username: Ray1936
Post Number: 740 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 207.200.116.139
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 3:53 pm: | |
I would date it about 1960. Michigan Avenue's Skid Row existed until about 1962, which is referred to in the booklet. Interesting find! Thanks for sharing. |
56packman Member Username: 56packman
Post Number: 512 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 129.9.163.105
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 4:12 pm: | |
GS-that "pedestrian mall" thing never worked in any city. It hastened any store, or shopping district's demise. Thank god that didn't happen. But thanks for sharing, and keep up the good work. |
Gsgeorge Member Username: Gsgeorge
Post Number: 3 Registered: 08-2006 Posted From: 141.211.173.230
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 4:25 pm: | |
Packman, I disagree. I've been to numerous pedestrian malls in the core areas of American cities and they're thriving: Ithaca, NY and Santa Monica, in particular. Of course, it helps if the surrounding areas haven't been plundered... Either way, I would've preferred a pedestrian mall along Woodward to anything else listed on this pamphlet. Thanks for pinpointing the year, Ray. |
Wash_man Member Username: Wash_man
Post Number: 57 Registered: 05-2006 Posted From: 69.221.80.238
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 4:39 pm: | |
Sorry for straying too much from the original topic, but the comments above reminded me of trips I made to the Twin Cities. Thriving pedestrian area here. Only taxis and buses allowed. (I found out the hard way as I followed a taxi into the mall in my rental car and wondered why everyone was looking at me!) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N icollet_Mall |
56packman Member Username: 56packman
Post Number: 513 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 129.9.163.234
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 4:50 pm: | |
Two words: Washington boulevard |
Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell
Post Number: 2839 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 209.183.32.13
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 5:00 pm: | |
Pedestrian malls I have visited in Guadalajara, Stuttgart and Copenhagen are immmensely successful and popular. I would love to see an uninterruptable pedestrian path from foxtown to rencen. |
Philm Member Username: Philm
Post Number: 24 Registered: 03-2005 Posted From: 66.77.102.10
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 5:11 pm: | |
"GS-that "pedestrian mall" thing never worked in any city. It hastened any store, or shopping district's demise. Thank god that didn't happen. But thanks for sharing, and keep up the good work." I work just a few blocks away from the Third Street Promenade in downtown Santa Monica. This area has become a thriving, revitalized little community in the years since the Promenade's construction, and the businesses along there do very well. By contrast, in 1978, I worked one block away from where I do now (in a recording studio formerly owned by The Beach Boys....a little nostalgia for the old folks) and the area was decayed, dangerous, and in general disrepair. I'm not saying the Promenade is responsible for all of the turnaround, but it certainly contributed. Phil |
Chitaku Member Username: Chitaku
Post Number: 621 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 69.136.147.97
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 5:12 pm: | |
Brothers Studio in Santa Monica |
Hornwrecker Member Username: Hornwrecker
Post Number: 1384 Registered: 04-2005 Posted From: 216.203.223.107
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 8:46 pm: | |
I tweaked the photo of the Midtown "improvement" in PS; if anyone wants to see an enlargement of a certain area, just ask. (One at a time, please.) The white buildings are proposed, gray = existing. |
River_rat Member Username: River_rat
Post Number: 196 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 68.166.44.44
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 8:55 pm: | |
Pedestrian malls are immensely successful throughout Europe and are well populated all year, winter included. Nearly every Swiss, German, Italian, Austrian, etc. town of any size has one. The difference and reason why? No significant personal violence crime there. Times are changing in Europe and many Europeans have concern of increasing personal safety issues such as ours |
Detroitej72 Member Username: Detroitej72
Post Number: 56 Registered: 05-2006 Posted From: 66.184.3.44
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 9:14 pm: | |
Unfortunately, they fail to enjoy the same success in the good old US of A. |
River_rat Member Username: River_rat
Post Number: 198 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 71.126.176.179
| Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 10:42 pm: | |
Detroitej72, when was the last time you were in Europe to see what I refer to in my comments? I am a proud American but the Europeams have some very nice places. I do concur that the USA is the best place to live, but we can learn to improve ourselves from other places . |
Jams Member Username: Jams
Post Number: 3568 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.74.13.202
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 12:20 am: | |
56packman,
quote:GS-that "pedestrian mall" thing never worked in any city. It hastened any store, or shopping district's demise. Thank god that didn't happen.
Please tell me that last sentence was sarcasm. That "wonderful" experiment of Woodward becoming a pedestrian mall with bus routes through it must resonate with you. |
Rasputin Member Username: Rasputin
Post Number: 3760 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.73.205.108
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 1:26 am: | |
Detroit had its "pedestrian mall" ON Woodward Ave. from Grand Circus Park to Campus Martius. It hastened the demise of Hudsons and other small businesses located there! So, it DIDN'T work for Detroit!! Go figure ..... on REAL Detroit history!! Kinda funny how they termed it .... "... Make Detroit Beautiful AGAIN" .... the age of Urban REMOVAL, a long time before 1967. Black-atcha .... not giving too much of a damn about other cities and how THEY choose to live. (Message edited by Rasputin on August 09, 2006) |
Planner_727 Member Username: Planner_727
Post Number: 27 Registered: 07-2006 Posted From: 69.87.150.106
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 9:25 am: | |
Thank god that didn't happen... I would surely have ruined all of our great retail options along Woodward today! :-) GSGeorge: More, please! |
220hendrie1910 Member Username: 220hendrie1910
Post Number: 34 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 20.137.2.50
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 9:27 am: | |
Burlington, VT has a pretty nifty four-block pedestrian mall that was humming nicely when I visited in June. Ottawa's Sparks Street Mall is an up-and-down thing, mostly due to high rents and restrictive leases, but it's been there for nearly 40 years. The impression I get is that college towns and other well-to-do burgs seem able to support shopping streets without vehicles, but others may not. Not-much-of-a-shopper in Ottawa. |
Gistok Member Username: Gistok
Post Number: 2586 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.72.149
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 9:37 am: | |
River_rat.... isn't it depressing coming back from a European trip and getting back onto our less than ideal freeways and roads. That's the first thing I think about whenever I return from visiting relatives in Germany. Geez, could American units of government learn something about road construction from the Europeans.... |
Gistok Member Username: Gistok
Post Number: 2587 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.72.149
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 9:43 am: | |
... also Europeans are walkers. American's wait for the closest parking spot to the mall. It would make for an interesting study to determine the average daily walking that Europeans do versus Americans. I bet that Europeans walk at least 3 times as far per day as Americans. It's our "auto culture" that makes the difference. |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1212 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 9:53 am: | |
Planner_727: "Thank god that didn't happen... I would surely have ruined all of our great retail options along Woodward today! :-) GSGeorge: More, please!" More (new) urban planner types, sheesh! That what's Detroit needs more of, NOT. Let's go back into time... That illustration was from about two/four years after Detroit's population peaked (~1958) and about five/seven years before the riots. Back then, the CBD was the major shopping district, with Dearborn's Michigan Avenue and Schaefer being the second busiest. A car-unfriendly shopping district plan was even implemented in Dearborn but was being scrapped only a couple years ago. Neither shopping district is thriving anymore and hasn't anytime recently. Dearborn says: "Bring back those cars (with potential shoppers inside). Please..." |
Fury13
Member Username: Fury13
Post Number: 1178 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.222.11.226
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 11:17 am: | |
For once, I agree with Rasputin. Unbelievable... Chicago tried a pedestrian mall on its famous State Street for a long time. It was an abysmal failure and just about killed the street. Since the street has been reopened to through traffic, it's thriving again. The ped mall concept might work in a small or mid-size US city, but certainly not in a large one (like Detroit). (And the European examples don't wash. We have a different mentality here.) |
Fury13
Member Username: Fury13
Post Number: 1179 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.222.11.226
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 11:32 am: | |
The more I look at that pamphlet, the more I notice a lot of that Le Corbusier-influenced "towers in a park" crap. The concept was de rigeur circa 1955-1960. I suppose some people might be seduced by the open green space, but it's very limited in walkability. Personal safety issues come into play too, with all that open area that's off the street. Think about it. It's essentially non-urban siting in an urban setting. I'm so glad the "towers in a park" concept has been largely discredited and we're back to zero-lot lines and high density -- classic urban planning that's walkable. The 19th century model worked, and still does today. And gee, wasn't the "towers in a park" concept REALLY EFFECTIVE in housing projects in Chicago, NY, Detroit, LA, etc., etc.? The residents of those buildings loved 'em so much that they systematically trashed them. |
Hornwrecker Member Username: Hornwrecker
Post Number: 1385 Registered: 04-2005 Posted From: 66.2.148.33
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 12:12 pm: | |
|
Rustic Member Username: Rustic
Post Number: 2740 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 128.36.14.52
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 12:14 pm: | |
As others have pointed out, there was a pedestrian mall in Detroit along the length of WW and another one-sided one along Wash blvd both of which were undeniable failures. Wayne State also created a pedestrian mall (of a different sort but a ped mall nonetheless) along second ave which, tho nice, did not do much in the ~40 years it has been in place to stabilize the surrounding areas retail or residential or provide much of a sense of community to WSU's pragmatic students. Rasputin points out the language in the proposal "make Detroit Beautiful AGAIN". I reckon that most people on this forum would likely say that all things considered the mid 50's, with DET's population peak, the regional economy chugging along, a couple generations of clever hard working migrants defining a new culture for Detroit, before the freeway construction ripping up inner city neighborhoods but after the pre war lawlessness and overt gangsterism, all the depression era auto boom construction complete and much in use etc ... this was likely DET's most beautiful point. "AGAIN" cw when? "AGAIN" Livernoisyard, I doubt MI/Scheaffer was the second busiest shopping district in the metro area back then ... GR/greenfield had 4 department stores (Wards (the largest in the area), Crowleys, Penney's, and the precursor of Federals) and waay more parking and was likely the busiest. The second busiest was likely the Highland park strip. MI/Schaeffer was probably as busy as GR/Oakman or Gratiot/7mile. An oddball shopping distract was New Center ... it was definately high end upscale (the dept stores were Saks and Crowleys) but it had the New Center well-heeled foot traffic and it sat along a major transit hub too. |
Neilr Member Username: Neilr
Post Number: 314 Registered: 06-2005 Posted From: 68.60.139.212
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 12:32 pm: | |
There was a Demery's Department Store in the New Center, on Woodward, just south of West Grand Blvd. I believe it was where the Am Track Station now stands. |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1213 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 12:46 pm: | |
One of the dailies stated that [Michigan & Schaefer was the second busiest during the early 1960s] when the Monkeys there went bankrupt. Again, it's not how many stores at any particular spot that matters, especially any stores in Detroit. The three most important rules in real estate: LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION. (Message edited by LivernoisYard on August 09, 2006) |
Swingline Member Username: Swingline
Post Number: 555 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 4.229.60.148
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 12:59 pm: | |
GSgeorge has a very interesting historical document. We can be grateful though that most of those visions never got implemented. Most of the significant principles promoted by the 50's/60's modernist urban planners have been discredited and discarded but not until widespread damage occurred across the country. Detroit adopted the urban renewal movement with a fervor unmatched by many other cities. A shameful displacement of minority communities occurred. We are kind of lucky in that what was built could have been much worse. While Lafayette Park and Elmwood Park have remained stable neighborhoods, the single use zoning imposed during the "renewal" sucked out a lot of the streetlife, rendered the area car-bound and prevented the area from achieving its true potential. |
Rustic Member Username: Rustic
Post Number: 2742 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 128.36.14.52
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 1:10 pm: | |
LY, I still doubt it in spite of your claim re the dailies. Re location: look at a map: GR greenfield was a better location, it was ringed by middle class and lower middle class housing for miles, MI/Schaefer was hemmed in on the S and a good part of the E by heavy industrial and about 1/2 the nearby neighborhoods in East dearborn and Detroit were poor, to the west a couple of miles of undeveloped farmland and woods separated it from middle class west dearborn. And yes the number of stores does matter, the more stores and more varitey of stores implies more customers. Otherwise why would they be there? These were not historic anchors. They could (and did) up and leave as soon as they felt like it. Perhpas by the 60's Northland might have been siphoning some of GR greenfield's business, but AIR even into the 70's Northland was pretty upscale (before they added pennys) cw GR/Greenfield. |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1214 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 1:38 pm: | |
Location: Dearborn vs. Detroit That should be enough for a reason, for most sane folk... |
Gianni Member Username: Gianni
Post Number: 238 Registered: 05-2004 Posted From: 209.104.144.90
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 1:52 pm: | |
Lafayette Park was one of the ideas in this plan that did happen, and did succeed. I realize that there was a lot of disruption at the time it was built. I've heard the stories from some of the original residents who first moved into the LP neigborhood. Nevertheless, the plan resulted in what is now one of the most stable, and economically and racially diverse neighborhoods in Detroit. A wonderful neighborhood, with a great quality of life, and within walking distance of everything downtown. The "Tower in a Park" idea worked here and it's still working. Certainly I wouldn't argue that this is the solution for the whole city, but there is no denying its success. There is plenty of room for both the new and the old in Detroit, although Lafayette Park is not "new" anymore -- it's a recognized historic district. Actually we're having a 50th anniversary celebration this September. |
Rustic Member Username: Rustic
Post Number: 2743 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 128.36.14.52
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 1:55 pm: | |
LY, Dearborn vs NW Detroit in the late 50's early 60's was not the nobrainer it may have seemed by the late 60's and beyond ... middle class NW detroit back then was larger and wealthier than Dearborn. (Some parts remain wealthier to this day, golly imagine that!) |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1215 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 2:07 pm: | |
Still, there were many thousands who chose not to shop in Detroit forty+ years ago. Imagine that... Remember when the shopping center era began around 1954 or so? Fairlane still is a big draw. So much so that their security comes down hard on juvenile Detroiters after 5 PM. BTW, just about any large strip mall anywhere in the burbs is busier than downtown today. Those living in Detroit today have no main alternatives to shopping elsewhere, regardless of their wealth. This just didn't start anytime lately. |
Rustic Member Username: Rustic
Post Number: 2744 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 128.36.14.52
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 2:48 pm: | |
LY, we are talking about 40+ years ago not trends that started 40+ years ago ... I believe you are mistaken about Mi/Schaefer back then, I have given several concrete examples to back up my point: # and variety of stores, relative size of parking areas, and demographics of surrounding areas. You have alluded vaguely to a newpaper article you once read and you have become increasingly subjective to bolster your point. Of course Dearborn eventually did become a destination shopping area for many Detroiters in the 70's but imo it was as much if not more MI/greenfield and WEST dearborn with the easy access stripmalls than MI/schaefer which was archaic and small (except for the medium sized ward's there wasn't much else there AIR, a half a block or so of small stores to the east and a block to the north up schaefer was about it --- the wards/sears combo down in AP had more in their nearby stripmalls in terms of convenient shopping). The fact that there were a few square miles of developable land bisecting d-bone some of which became fairlane in the late 70's/80s (and later the ford rd developments in the 80's/90's) kinda reinforces my point about east dearborn being relatively isolated back in the late 50's/60's CW GR/Greenfield. |
Rustic Member Username: Rustic
Post Number: 2745 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 128.36.14.52
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 2:50 pm: | |
... anyway if only they had converted it to a pedestrian mall dearborn would have turned into a Santa Monica ... |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1218 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 6:14 pm: | |
It's not easy going through the archives for either paper after the limited time that they're available for free. I'm not the least bit interested in paying for older articles... |
Rustic Member Username: Rustic
Post Number: 2749 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.234.183.131
| Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 9:08 pm: | |
LY, hey no problem ... rereading my last post to you it reads more confrontational than I intended. It's a minor point faar off topic to the thread at hand. |
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity
Post Number: 307 Registered: 05-2005 Posted From: 69.212.61.25
| Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 12:35 am: | |
It looks like an architect's scheme to create hell on earth. A more appropriate title for the plan would be "I love cars and hate pedestrians" It reminds me of the great city-hating schemes of the twisted and sick Corbusier ("let's bulldoze Paris!") and Wright. |
Fury13
Member Username: Fury13
Post Number: 1180 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.222.11.226
| Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 1:45 pm: | |
Amen, Futurecity. And, great post, Swingline (8/9 @ 12:59 pm). Regarding Lafayette Park: it works because it's mostly townhouses with walkable space around them. The townhouses are very accessible from the sidewalk, so it feels like a neighborhood. Also, there are only two towers in the area, if I remember correctly, and they're fairly close to other structures and sidewalks. So it's not really the kind of "towers in a park" development that Corbusier envisioned. If you want to see a closer example to THAT in the metro area, take a look at the skyscrapers spaced out along Big Beaver Road in Troy. This is the area that Troy wants to develop into a "downtown," but it's impossible -- the whole beyond-human-scale siting of the road makes it entirely unwalkable. (Message edited by Fury13 on August 10, 2006) |