The recent news that Monument Circle in Downtown Indy is going the way of Times Square and Heralds Square in New York by becoming a pedestrian only space is an interesting development to say the least. If you follow my blog, you remember that I recommended this change on a previous post, believing it should be the ultimate goal of the City to turn the Circle into a pedestrian mall, opening up the space for programmed events, outdoor seating, and other pedestrian activity. Further, I wrote a piece on the ‘pedestrianization acceleration’ trend occurring across the country, as City after City is choking down their streets, turning spaces into pedestrian malls, and truly beginning to prioritize the pedestrian in urban designs. So I applaud Indianapolis for continuing to be on the forefront of this movement (see the Cultural Trail for another ‘pedestrianization acceleration’ example) and hope that Monument Circle can succeed as a pedestrian mall and truly become a world-class public space. With that said, as it stands today, is Monument Circle ready to become a pedestrian mall?
My simple answer is a cautious no; the Circle does not currently have the storefront activity or pedestrian traffic to support such a move. If there is one lesson to be learned from the failed American pedestrian malls of the past, it is that such spaces should not be used for economic development or to attract business. Instead, malls should only further enhance spaces where existing pedestrian activity is healthy and strong. Essentially, pedestrian malls can be an urban design technique to make good spaces great. Ultimately, this is why the Times Square pedestrianization experiment has been so successful. And yet, Indianapolis leaders are heralding their own pedestrianization experiment as an economic development initiative, something that worries me and makes me dubious about turning the Circle into a pedestrian mall right now.
While I truly believe in pedestrian policies, I think a few things need to happen before such a change can take place on the Circle. First and foremost, the City needs to be engaged with the current owners of Circle real estate frontage, creating more storefronts and having an inside-out approach to retailing which would connect the public realm with private uses. This would attract investment and higher pedestrian counts, creating a healthier pedestrian realm. After such investment occurs and the Circle turns into an even better place for pedestrian activity, then the City should look into turning the space into a pedestrian mall – taking the Circle from good to great.
With that said, the Circle will be going the way of a pedestrian mall in August, whether it’s ready or not. Since it is going to happen, I have a few questions about implementation. First, why is this experiment only lasting a month? This timeframe seems too short to come to any concrete conclusions regarding the success of this trial. Instead, the City should look at a June-August schedule, lasting the duration of summer and allowing the populace to get used to the idea of a pedestrian mall downtown. Second, are there any events or space utilization planned for this month-long experiment? I hope so, as something special needs to happen to draw patrons down to the Circle to see firsthand the vitality a pedestrian mall can create. If the space is simply opened and the new space isn’t utilized, expect the experiment to wane in popularity. And third, what are the pedestrian mall boundaries going to be? I recommend extending the mall out a half-block in each direction on Meridian and Market, giving even more space for possible programmed events that are badly needed on the Circle.
Despite my cautious tone towards this development, I am hopeful for its success. But in order for this to occur, the City needs to answer the questions I put forth and make sure the experiment is carried out in a monumental way – if you will. Only then will the public truly see the possibilities of a pedestrian mall and begin to champion its permanence. If this doesn’t happen, don’t expect the Circle to be a part of the pedestrianization acceleration trend going on across the country – something Indianapolis can’t afford to miss out on.
I agree with you. I was hesitant when I first heard about this idea. I love the idea of giving the streets back to pedestrians, but I worry that this will not be successful in its current form. There needs to be more business for pedestrians to patronize. Additionally, I think that cars, people, horses…everyone coexist rather well in its current form. I think this is well-intentioned and I’d like to see it last, but I’m concerned in the wake of other pedestrian malls that were created to enhance economic development and ultimately failed.
Hi, I just found your website and think it looks very interesting.
I agree with the comments about the Circle, there is a definite lack of storefronts and existing pedestrian activity in the area. The circle itself is great, but all of the feeder roads that spoke out from it contribute nothing to a pedestrian friendly atmosphere.
Even if the circle were to be successful as a pedestrian space in its current form (which I doubt), nothing else in the city would be affected. There is a definite opportunity to increase pedestrian activity without closing down roads, and I’d like to see Indianapolis take some steps in that direction as well.
A better choice would have been Broad Ripple Avenue?
Greg, I think your instincts are right about whether this will work. Programming would surely help, but most likely it would pump up use for the events themselves but leave pedestrian use unchanged the rest of the time. A longer period would, as you suggest, get people used to the idea–but why not target times of year when folks REALLY want to be outdoors (Apri- May and September/October)? Testing the idea during the hottest and most humid month possible (and one in which some significant portion of downtown workers will likely be away on vacation) almost seems designed to produce bad results.
You bring up a good point in the compare and contrast with Times Square. It is important to remember that people go to Times Square because it is in New York, not the other way around. It seems that horse has been put before the carriage (both of which may now be banned from the Circle.) But since the Circle performs well as pedestrian/auto space and equally well as a pedestrian space during events, why does this have to be an either/or proposition instead of both/and?
I can see the Circle being a great pedestrian space at 7:00 pm on a Friday evening in September, but five months later in February? I’m not as confident. So why not make the necessary infrastructure improvements and program the space exclusively for pedestrians when they will want it and allow auto and other transit access when it is necessary for the year round vitality of the Circle?
I’m right there too. I’d love for the Circle to be pedestrian only — but what would address the change of traffic pattern? And how would the city address the safety issue? Since there are no storefronts to speak of on the Circle, the after-hours foot traffic is rather safe because of the car traffic. Take the car traffic away, and now nobody will be on the Circle. Pretty sure I wouldn’t walk through it.
I think we should experiment with the New Orleans Bourbon Street (closed at night) and Royal Street (closed by day) model; how about closing the Circle from 10:00am to 2:00pm each day for lunchtime pedestrian activities, and leaving it open at other times for vehicles?
i have to say i disagree with many people here in that i have never wished or wanted The Circle to become a pedestrian only space. Why? What could possibly be gained from that? seriously, i would love for someone who said they want to see this to answer, What are the benefits of turning the circle into a pedestrian only space?
at present the design of the space allows for easy and comfortable use by all modes of travel with minimal conflict. The Circle is rife with traffic calming devices that many planners and engineers consider to be on the cutting edge of urban design but have been part of The Circle’s makeup for decades and may have been purely accidental. it is a space where drivers naturally slow down and pay attention: the curved nature of the road means they cannot see as far ahead of them as they are accustomed to on straight roads, the textured driving surface makes high speeds loud and uncomfortable, the complete lack of any directional or signalized vehicular controls forces drivers to pay closer attention to what’s happening all around them, and finally the numerous street trees and concrete bollards create visual barriers that make the street feel narrower than it is. all these elements add up to provide drivers with an environment where the only comfortable speed is a slow one, which makes this a safe place for pedestrians.
as a pedestrian on The Circle i have never been terribly aware of the vehicular traffic apart from the occasional noisy motorcycle, the sidewalks along the outer rim are very wide, especially considering some of the tiny strips of pavement that pass for sidewalks in Indy. the curbs are low, and in the center nonexistent. walking around the center ring the only thing separating pedestrians from traffic are those concrete bollards which are technically wide enough for a car to drive thru (i’ve seen the police do it occasionally) but i’ve never felt unsafe. in fact that’s probably one of my favorite areas to stroll around the city. passing from the outer ring to the inner ring can be confusing for new comers with the lack of any designated crosswalks. but again, i feel this is a strength, it forces pedestrians to be aware of whats going on around them and not assume those white stripes on the ground are going to protect them.
i’ve said it before and i’ll say it again: The Circle is a fantastic asset precisely because it does and amazingly good job at balancing vehicular and pedestrian traffic right now. if only every intersection in the city could do so as well. if it aint broke, don’t fix it!
Times Square is not, at all, fully closed to traffic. I was just there and think the closure may involve a minority of the streets. Also, it is not good to compare Indianapolis to Manhatten; the density in the latter crushes our town many times over. Maybe a better model in NYC is Columbus Circle, still open to traffic but enhanced, I’m told, for pedestrians.
Also, a main point in the discussion of the closure of Monument Circle to cars and trucks is the need of all or almost all buildings on the Circle and the four spokes to have access to cars and trucks from the Circle and spokes. What is left of the alleys is not enough. Short-term parking and loading for deliveries, pick-ups, parking shuttles and customers is very, very important. Each building and tenant has specific needs essential for the economic viability of the buildings and tenants.
In my opinion, the Circle does need a major infrastructure rehab since the present bricks and concrete were installed in about 1980 and are in poor shape in many places. Maybe traffic can be reduced to an effective two lanes and one lane (the inner lane around the Monument?) can go to bike, pedestrian, with a loading, parking lane remaining on the outside. Maybe the inner lane becomes the Cultural Trail lollipop with a narrow bike lane up Meridian St. south of the Circle. Maybe the infrastructure rehab includes permanent or moveable street fixtures that, by quadrant, can be put in place for periodic closures for programmed uses.
Maybe even a lazy river for floating on the inside of the inner lane; I am serious but it will never happen.