[M II A II R II K]

Are pedestrian malls the future or the relic of antiquated thinking?


May 3rd, 2010

Yonah Freemark

Read More: http://americancity.org/columns/entry/2272/

###############################################

Even as New York City makes big news for transforming parts of 34th Street into a pedestrian mall, Sacramento is pulling back from the concept. Four decades after first closing a section of downtown’s K Street to automobile traffic, the leaders of California’s capital have had enough. They want the cars back to bring new vitality to the city’s streets to save businesses threatened by extinction due to a lack of traffic. In the post-war period, many medium-sized American cities seemed to be doing it — by forcing cars off the downtown business corridors, the assumption was that retail traffic would thrive just as it was in the big new shopping malls being built in every region. Influenced by the example of Kalamazoo, Michigan, which pedestrianized Burdick Street in 1959, more than 200 other cities hoped that this approach would bring new vitality to their dying centers by beautifying the street and encouraging consumption-oriented strolling.

Unfortunately, the suburban malls mostly won the contest; in cities across America, pedestrian malls or not, downtowns were mostly dead by the 1990s. The lack of noise, pollution, and danger associated with fewer cars was replaced by something that induced a lot more fear: A lack of people. Potential crime was far more detrimental to business growth than the possibility of being run over in a car. Sacramento has experienced a slow decline in its downtown since the introduction of the transit mall, though it’s unclear whether that loss of business was a result of the loss of cars from K Street or just the inevitable consequence of the lack of interest in shopping downtown experienced by cities nationwide. The addition of light rail service to K Street in 1987 didn’t improve the situation appreciably as it replaced what had been an entirely pedestrian boulevard with a light rail right-of-way.

And so the obvious course was to reverse direction. Kalamazoo moved to reintroduce cars to its downtown in 2000. Cities like Raleigh, North Carolina followed its example several years later. Even Sacramento conducted an experiment a few years ago to reopen a couple blocks of the mall and instantly saw more retail traffic. So the city will now spend $2.7 million to bring cars back in by late next year. Cars will be allowed to travel along one lane in each direction at a maximum of 15 mph with no parking. It is hoped that this influx of vehicles will bring more eyes to the street and thus improve the downtown’s business environment.

###############################################




Sacramento’s K Street Transit Mall Credit: El Cobrador

 

[reaperexpress]

Unfortunately, the suburban malls mostly won the contest; in cities across America, pedestrian malls or not, downtowns were mostly dead by the 1990s. The lack of noise, pollution, and danger associated with fewer cars was replaced by something that induced a lot more fear: A lack of people. Potential crime was far more detrimental to business growth than the possibility of being run over in a car.

Good thing we aren't America. Our downtown never died, and didn't become a slum. If anything, the suburban malls became slums, with crime being much higher at areas such as Jane/Finch than downtown. I was also not aware that cars were such crime stoppers.

A lack of cars does not equal a lack of people. Maybe in America people do not exist outside of cars, but that's certainly not the case here.

Sacramento has experienced a slow decline in its downtown since the introduction of the transit mall, though it’s unclear whether that loss of business was a result of the loss of cars from K Street or just the inevitable consequence of the lack of interest in shopping downtown experienced by cities nationwide. The addition of light rail service to K Street in 1987 didn’t improve the situation appreciably as it replaced what had been an entirely pedestrian boulevard with a light rail right-of-way.

And so the obvious course was to reverse direction. Kalamazoo moved to reintroduce cars to its downtown in 2000. Cities like Raleigh, North Carolina followed its example several years later. Even Sacramento conducted an experiment a few years ago to reopen a couple blocks of the mall and instantly saw more retail traffic. So the city will now spend $2.7 million to bring cars back in by late next year. Cars will be allowed to travel along one lane in each direction at a maximum of 15 mph with no parking. It is hoped that this influx of vehicles will bring more eyes to the street and thus improve the downtown’s business environment.

So I guess some really car oriented cities can't handle pedestrians. But here in Toronto, if you had a light rail line down a transit mall, it would be full of people so it's not exactly a fair comparison.

 

[kettal]

the successful (ie busy) pedestrian malls I have seen are essentially outdoor Yorkdales. Rarely are they the most interesting part of town.

 

[Mapleson]

First, pedestrian malls/districts haven't been a big thing in Canada. We generally don't have the sustained daytime traffic and downtown shopping demand to warrent it. If you don't have enough foot traffic to make pedestrianize a road advantageous for business, it's just chasing policy and empty dreams. Second, when implemented with a solid alternative transportation plan, pedestrian malls can revitalize an area, just like any re-development and investment. Manchester and Liverpool are two big examples where a pedestrianized or transit only road can reduce crime rates and boost safety. However, these things don't come out of the fact that their are no cars, but that they thought about the consequences of removing vehicular traffic and made allowances for it. I don't think many people in Kalamazoo, Michigan in 1959 were thinking about secondary security issues. Third, this is Canada. Pedestrian malls do no make sense for winter in most parts of Canada. Instead, we have underground walkways like PATH.

 

[Justin10000]

Just post the entire article, in case members are not willing to visit the site.

 

[MisterF]

Pedestrian malls are definitely not a relic of antiquated thinking. Cities in other parts of the world have them by the dozen. But in North America we've tended to build them in the wrong places and for the wrong reasons. Banning cars from a dying main street in the hopes that it will revitalize will usually fail. Successful pedestrian streets are usually short, not major thoroughfares, and already crowded with pedestrians when they're closed to traffic. I think the fact that we attach the word "mall" to the concept shows that North Americans don't quite grasp how to do it right.

Here's a few examples of successful pedestrian streets in Ottawa, Madrid, and London.

I was also not aware that cars were such crime stoppers.

A lack of cars does not equal a lack of people. Maybe in America people do not exist outside of cars, but that's certainly not the case here.

It's the eyes on the street idea. If there aren't any other pedestrians then a street with no cars can feel very desolate.

Third, this is Canada. Pedestrian malls do no make sense for winter in most parts of Canada. Instead, we have underground walkways like PATH.

Toronto has bustling sidewalks all through winter, as do colder cities like Ottawa and Quebec City. Pedestrian streets work just fine here when they're done right.

 

[M II A II R II K]

During the summer time maybe segments of Queen West and Yonge St. would be in order.

 

[Hipster Duck]

the successful (ie busy) pedestrian malls I have seen are essentially outdoor Yorkdales. Rarely are they the most interesting part of town.

Yeah, I agree with you. I've never been to a pedestrian mall in a large European city that wasn't a) full of chain store retail or b) a tourist trap. We should also not forget that the Eaton Center and PATH, being open at all hours (even if the stores aren't), qualify as pedestrian streets.

Then we also have a lot of outdoor, informal pedestrian malls: the lane that cuts from Yorkville to Cumberland Sts. that passes by the Hugo Boss store and Remy's; the one that cuts through Market Village between Front St. and St. James Cathedral; the one on the east side of Market Village that abuts the north St. Lawrence market, etc.

Now that I come to think about it, Toronto is actually excellent in terms of pedestrian-only precincts. They're just not on any maps.

 

[MisterF]

Here's one in Quebec City. In winter. With people!

Yeah, I agree with you. I've never been to a pedestrian mall in a large European city that wasn't a) full of chain store retail or b) a tourist trap. We should also not forget that the Eaton Center and PATH, being open at all hours (even if the stores aren't), qualify as pedestrian streets.

Then we also have a lot of outdoor, informal pedestrian malls: the lane that cuts from Yorkville to Cumberland Sts. that passes by the Hugo Boss store and Remy's; the one that cuts through Market Village between Front St. and St. James Cathedral; the one on the east side of Market Village that abuts the north St. Lawrence market, etc.

Now that I come to think about it, Toronto is actually excellent in terms of pedestrian-only precincts. They're just not on any maps.

Well in Europe they tend to close off streets because they're so busy with pedestrians, and those tend to be tourist areas with chain stores. I don't think that's a bad thing.

 

[jwill]

If anyone has been to Burlington vermont they have a few blocks of pedestrian mall. Same climate, but it works great. Actually its one of the few active streets in the small city. But there is plenty of access by cars on frequent cross-streets and nearby parking garages.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Instead of pedestrian malls, which has a rather mixed track record in terms of successes, why not consider Woonerfs instead? a single lane, two way roadway with slow traffic and a generous pedestrian realm probably works just as well while maintaining flexiblity and access. A few removable bollards at strategic locations can turns the road into pedestrian only when circumstances demands.

AoD

 

[kEiThZ]

If anyone has been to Burlington vermont they have a few blocks of pedestrian mall. Same climate, but it works great. Actually its one of the few active streets in the small city. But there is plenty of access by cars on frequent cross-streets and nearby parking garages.

+1

That street is incredibly well executed. What's notable about that that street too is the quality of stores on it. And the number of bars and restaurants.

Contrast that to Sparks St in Ottawa. That place shuts down at 6pm. There aren't enough bars and restaurants to keep things going past 6pm. And there aren't any stores good enough to encourage people to stay around after hours. And there aren't enough residents nearby to keep the street active (unlinke the students in Burlington). It takes a lot more than just taking away the cars.

 

[Hipster Duck]

Well in Europe they tend to close off streets because they're so busy with pedestrians, and those tend to be tourist areas with chain stores. I don't think that's a bad thing.

The Eaton Centre already fulfills that role. It's downtown's pedestrian chain store experience + tourist attraction. The only difference between it and a German pedestrian mall is that one is indoors and privately managed (the Eaton Centre walkways are accessible 24 hours a day).

Instead of pedestrian malls, which has a rather mixed track record in terms of successes, why not consider Woonerfs instead? a single lane, two way roadway with slow traffic and a generous pedestrian realm probably works just as well while maintaining flexiblity and access. A few removable bollards at strategic locations can turns the road into pedestrian only when circumstances demands.

I agree. I would argue that St. Nicholas and Croft St. are practically Woonerfs, but the traffic rules need to be legitimized; the streets in Kensington Market would be another candidate for 'Woonerferization'.

Like I said, Toronto is not a bad pedestrian city. I would actually rate us and Montreal at the top in North America. The big kicker is that a lot of our pedestrian infrastructure is in private hands and not formally indicated on city maps. This privatized, or informal public space is fine with me as long as access to these spaces isn't excluded to patrons (and they rarely are), especially since the City has a lousy track record for maintaining our public realm. For people who live here and know their way around, it's incredibly good.

 

[W. K. Lis]

A pedestrian mall needs people. That means multi-level, multi-use buildings around it. Single use building cannot support it. Single level buildings cannot support it. And it needs people, even late at night. If there are no people there at night, it will suffer. And since streets will be closed off, public transit is a definite. Not garages.

 

[kEiThZ]

^ Well put Hipster.

To back up your example. Case in point: the PATH. Out of towners are always amazingly impressed by our PATH system in my experience.