Downtown Observations
[So, I know I said I was going to post the results of my research on job growth in NEO, but stumbling on this (which was reiterated here) made me realize that I want to do some research with an actual reference collection in front of me. Please believe a librarian when she says not everything's on the Internet. For all the unflattering things I say about working in public libraries, it really does make my heart ache to not be near a reference collection every day.]
Anyway, I went downtown for the first time yesterday. I went to the Communities of Choice forum at the Levin College of Urban Affairs. I saw a lot of people wearing suits and even got to meet Carole Cohen. A good time was had by all.
I had not been downtown since December 2005, and I had not been to Cleveland State since 2000 when I graduated. I got off the bus at Public Square and walked down Superior to East 6th (had to pay my respects to the library), then turned right and continued down Euclid.
Here's what I thought.
1. Downtown is really freaking cold. New York winters really made a wuss out of me. But you know what? Bracing cold winds are good for you. Put on a wool hat and get outside. Unless you are homeless. Then get inside, get something to eat, and stay warm, please.
2. About this Euclid Corridor thing. I remember hearing about it for the first time when I was at Cleveland State about 10 years ago. If I'm not mistaken, an earlier plan included a tree-lined median with a streetcar, like Van Aken or Shaker Blvd. Sigh. The sort-of finished part near Cleveland State put me in mind of the Boulevard of Death, which is what I'd been picturing.
3. That's the Breuer Building?!? So, duh, all this time I've been picturing not just the wrong building but the wrong location. The visual effect of stumbling upon the Breuer building, with the Cleveland Trust Rotunda in front of it, is truly stunning. Not only was I stunned by it yesterday, but deep in my subconscious lay a memory of being stunned by it many years ago as a wet-behind-the-ears college student who knew nothing of a) the world or b) architecture and its place in the process of urban renewal. The Cleveland Trust Rotunda would be beautiful enough on its own, but there are so many other good looking buildings nearby that it really needs that lovably hideous tower behind it to give it that extra punch.
4. To repeat: there are so many beautiful buildings in downtown Cleveland. It's astounding to me that this place ever fell on hard times while ugly places like where I lived in New Jersey manage to thrive. At moments like these, I want to write those people off as unsophisticated cretins. (My New Jersey friends would be mad at me, though, so I won't.)
5. Even Cleveland State is so ugly it's almost beautiful. Rhodes Tower is simply an icon of 1970s utilitarianism. Besides, I have a weakness for the interiors of 1970s buildings. (Yeah, I know.)
6. There is an awful lot of parking downtown. And not just the surface parking that was the main reason we decided not to move to the Warehouse District. It seemed like there were whole blocks devoted to parking garages.
7. Guess how many people asked me for money? Exactly zero. Don't stay away from downtown because you are afraid of panhandlers.
Anyway, I went downtown for the first time yesterday. I went to the Communities of Choice forum at the Levin College of Urban Affairs. I saw a lot of people wearing suits and even got to meet Carole Cohen. A good time was had by all.
I had not been downtown since December 2005, and I had not been to Cleveland State since 2000 when I graduated. I got off the bus at Public Square and walked down Superior to East 6th (had to pay my respects to the library), then turned right and continued down Euclid.
Here's what I thought.
1. Downtown is really freaking cold. New York winters really made a wuss out of me. But you know what? Bracing cold winds are good for you. Put on a wool hat and get outside. Unless you are homeless. Then get inside, get something to eat, and stay warm, please.
2. About this Euclid Corridor thing. I remember hearing about it for the first time when I was at Cleveland State about 10 years ago. If I'm not mistaken, an earlier plan included a tree-lined median with a streetcar, like Van Aken or Shaker Blvd. Sigh. The sort-of finished part near Cleveland State put me in mind of the Boulevard of Death, which is what I'd been picturing.
3. That's the Breuer Building?!? So, duh, all this time I've been picturing not just the wrong building but the wrong location. The visual effect of stumbling upon the Breuer building, with the Cleveland Trust Rotunda in front of it, is truly stunning. Not only was I stunned by it yesterday, but deep in my subconscious lay a memory of being stunned by it many years ago as a wet-behind-the-ears college student who knew nothing of a) the world or b) architecture and its place in the process of urban renewal. The Cleveland Trust Rotunda would be beautiful enough on its own, but there are so many other good looking buildings nearby that it really needs that lovably hideous tower behind it to give it that extra punch.
4. To repeat: there are so many beautiful buildings in downtown Cleveland. It's astounding to me that this place ever fell on hard times while ugly places like where I lived in New Jersey manage to thrive. At moments like these, I want to write those people off as unsophisticated cretins. (My New Jersey friends would be mad at me, though, so I won't.)
5. Even Cleveland State is so ugly it's almost beautiful. Rhodes Tower is simply an icon of 1970s utilitarianism. Besides, I have a weakness for the interiors of 1970s buildings. (Yeah, I know.)
6. There is an awful lot of parking downtown. And not just the surface parking that was the main reason we decided not to move to the Warehouse District. It seemed like there were whole blocks devoted to parking garages.
7. Guess how many people asked me for money? Exactly zero. Don't stay away from downtown because you are afraid of panhandlers.
posted by Christine at 9:48 AM
17 Comments:
Christine omg I almost choked on my lunch at the Blvd of Death thingy lol. I'm hoping it's not quite that problematic on Euclid! I too wish there were trolley's but c'est la vie. The streetscaping sounds like it's going to be done well, time will tell.
I'm in love with the new wing of the Library; not so fond of any of the CSU bldgs, and lament the fact that we don't have a lot of Art Deco Architecture downtown...
Still thinking about the Blvd of Death...make a great name for a new band.
Did you ever see the "Making Sense of Place" special regarding Cleveland on PBS? It came on last night at 9:00 PM. It's a very good special where Clevelanders discuss urban sprawl, Crocker Park, the decline of manufaturing, and even all the downtown parking lots. I understand it was cheaper to level historical buildings and make them parking lots than to leave them standing and empty because they were not helping the city earn property taxes. You should definitely check it out if you haven't already.
As for me, I live in Westlake but I love downtown, especially in the summer. Summer events like the Gravity Games and Ingenuity really helped me to appreciate the city. However, my concerns for my kids' education and crime in the city keep me in the burbs. At least for now.
A preview of the video can be found here:
http://www.makingsenseofplacefilms.com
I doubt the city has ever demolished a downtown office building because it was empty. The property owners will do it if they think they can make more money from a parking lot than from a bulding.
-johnj (your neighbor, Christine -- I use a pseudo to blog)
"So ugly it's beautiful." A resonant phrase that many would argue applies to Cleveland itself. And you probably would have found more panhandlers later at night, though of course the downtown alliance's ad campaign has no doubt forced some homeless to seek other venues.
Another thought: in your original post, you expressed a preference for electric streetcars (on rails) over the buses that are actually going to be used on the Euclid Corridor. This is a very common preference, but what do you think it's based on?
For older people, I think a lot of it is nostalgia pure and simple, but I don't think that's true for people (like me) who never saw the streetcars in the first place. Ah, but you've spent time living near the Shaker Rapid perhaps? I forget about that. We didn't have anything like that when I grew up in the Washington DC area.
I personally think that city buses (not long distance buses, particularly) always seem ungainly and....slow. Underpowered and overwhelmed. I don't know if streetcars would seem different or not. These seem like purely aesthetic issues though, not a very rational basis on which to pick a transportation technology, but I do wonder how much of the dislike of buses (and I think it's very common, as I said above) are purely aesthetic issues like this.
Streetcars would be less smelly, maybe less noisy; those are real quality of life issues.
I do wonder if people remember all the overhead wires when they think wistful thoughts about streetcars. More aesthetics.
-john
Hmm... I do like buses, actually. Van Aken and Shaker Blvd. are aesthetically pleasing with the rapid running down the median - what I don't like about the Red Line is that it's all hidden - you can't see it. Instituting a new, highly visible light rail line would (for me at least) be a sign that the city is serious about public transit -it's more permanent than just a bus lane, which could just be converted into a regular traffic lane. It also seems like light rail is one step closer to heavy passenger rail, although I have no proof of that, really.
I really miss the subway.
The unfortunate reality, Christine, is that the federal government has all but choked off further development of light rail around the country, even where it's really needed in higher-density cities than Cleveland. They've done this obliquely, by deciding that the federal contribution to these projects will be just 20%, while highway projects get 50% funding from the states. That generally means the former are dead on arrival, before they ever get off the drawing boards.
Sorry, my error: that should have read "50% funding from the feds."
Oh, also, I think people have a dislike of buses because "poor people ride them." In New York, there's a tiered hierarchy to who takes what kind of public transit: the richest people take cabs or have private cars, then there's the subway, then there's the bus.
Portland's TriMet trains have overhead wires, but they are pretty darn good-looking, I think....
Well, hopefully success stories like Charlotte's brand-new light rail system will reverse that trend....
Very interesting. Thanks for that link, Christine, because I had no idea Charlotte was doing that. It helps, of course, that half of Ohio (and a few other midwestern states) seems to be moving to North Carolina these days. Plus, Charlotte is the new banking capital of the world, with the recently merged Bank of America being HQed there. So that economy is really humming, and they can thus afford their share. Sadly, most cities and regions can't.
Yes, Portland is maybe the best example to be found anywhere of a great use of municipal light rail. But their uncommon density, brought about by the most aggressive use of urban growth boundaries in America, makes it more amenable to rail than most places, and thus not really a useful comparison for Cleveland.
I wasn't really comparing TriMet vs. RTA as a whole, just their relative ugliness - based on Mr. Beckley's comment about the unattractiveness of overhead wires. And also probably because I've been reading Tim Gunn's style guide all afternoon. ;)
Wouldn't it be nice though if, amid all this talk of regionalism, *we* would institute some stricter growth boundaries?
No, I understand. As for growth boundaries, that's really more a function of state government than anything. Oregon took the lead among the states, because they're just more progressive than most, but also because Portland and other coastal areas (Portland's actually a little inland, along a river) felt under siege by thousands of Los Angelenos fleeing overcrowding there. Anyway, the Oregon legislature is about two centuries ahead of the Ohio legislature on these kinds of issues, and I wouldn't expect them to catch up any time soon.
good discussion on transit issues here. in regards to portland and oregon being progressive, it should be stated that it was republican governor tom mccall who initiated many of oregon's 'progressive' policies in the mid 60's including the country's first bottle bill, as well as policies to keep waterfront land in the public realm and plan for land use on a statewide basis. today, mccall is memorialized in a waterfront park along the wilamette.
Good point, Guv (and you have an interesting blog that I'd never come across, by the way). I think the most progressive thing the city ever did, which set the tone for many other such decisions later, was tear up the highway hugging the river downtown and instead put in parks and walking trails. It literally transformed the entire city. I didn't know he was a Republican, but then, in Oregon, Republicans wouldn't get away with being doctrinaire conservatives.
Post a Comment
<< Home