Personally, (and I don't have a classical urban planning background, either .. just thought I'd pipe in) I think that if Cleveland already had more of an energy on the streets pedestrian-wise, I don't think I would have as much of an issue with the walkway thing.

 

But it doesn't, so much .. because, over the decades, people have become more and more about cars, and the convenience associated with them.

 

But cities should be a place where people CONVERGE, not avoid one another. I think that, until there's more of a cultural/mentality shift in Cleveland, planning shouldn't be done to encourage the anti-urban thing.

 

And that goes for visitors to the city, too. I mean, I can understand during the winter months, because Cleveland's winters are brutal on the lake. Maybe something can be done during those months, at least .. some kind of shuttle service or something. I don't know. People's concerns about weather are valid, I think. If they don't enjoy themselves in a city and it's largely to do with the weather, maybe they won't come back.

^But who says thoughtfully designed enclosed pedestrian connections aren't "urban"?  And that people can't converge there?  At the very least, I don't see how this feeds into car use at all- quite the opposite, I'd think better connecting Tower City to other buildings would be a boon for RTA.

Certainly Urban planners and business leaders/convention planners have different objectives, with the business leaders/convention planners advocating what is "best" (easiest) for the (lazy) conventioneer, usually at the expense of good planning principles.  That was part of the problem with the team that was put together by GCP for recommending a site....  not a single planner or architect on the team, thus the selection of Tower City (which Steven Litts article points out the lacking planning principles)  in favor for connectivity with the idea of connecting everything to Tower City that isn't already..... 

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2008/08/the_proposal_to_locate_a.html

 

"Worse still, backers of the convention center and medical mart proposal want to build a large new system of underground and overhead walkways to connect the new facilities at Tower City Center to the rest of downtown.

 

That's truly creepy.

 

The report released yesterday by civic leaders who recommended the Tower City location said that an efficient system of walkways "would be the only one in the country that could allow the business traveler from the airport to come directly to the new convention/medical mart complex and related amenities without confronting a challenging climate at any time during the year."...

 

 

If the weather is bad, a visitor is more likely to enter into an establishment for temporary shelter and spend some money.

 

A comfort passage lets them bypass it all.

 

This should be an economy generator.

 

 

Pray tell, what establishments are there between St. Clair/Ontario and the SE corner of Public Square that would be bypassed?  The restaurants in the Marriott?

 

The point of this would be to connect pedestrians in the Conv. Center to the parts of the City (Euclid, E. 4th) that actually have establishments, and also to tie it to the main rail hub.  The only thing bypassed would be our glorious central traffic islands we generously call Public Square.

^But who says thoughtfully designed enclosed pedestrian connections aren't "urban"? And that people can't converge there? At the very least, I don't see how this feeds into car use at all- quite the opposite, I'd think better connecting Tower City to other buildings would be a boon for RTA.

 

I'm not. I'm just saying that I'm worried about the culture that is specific to cities like Cleveland, where the majority of the region is predominantly anti-urban in their thinking.

 

I'm not saying it's a bad idea in general, necessarily. But .. is it beneficial to Cleveland's urban fabric as a whole? Or does it only provide a channel for convenient travel from one place to another, siphoning pedestrians from businesses in the area?

 

Maybe not. I'm certainly open to the idea, if the case can be argued that these walkways don't destroy the greater urban energy that I think is so important.

 

I'm not saying it's a bad idea in general, necessarily. But .. is it beneficial to Cleveland's urban fabric as a whole? Or does it only provide a channel for convenient travel from one place to another, siphoning pedestrians from businesses in the area?

 

Maybe not. I'm certainly open to the idea, if the case can be argued that these walkways don't destroy the greater urban energy that I think is so important.

 

I guess the proposal is that walkways could be part of the greater urban energy.  And again, there not only aren't businesses in the immediate area- because of the Justice Center and other existing buildings, there isn't even much potential for new businesses in the immediate area, unless they are on-site, which won't increase pedestrian activity in any case.

If the weather is bad, a visitor is more likely to enter into an establishment for temporary shelter and spend some money.

 

A comfort passage lets them bypass it all.

 

This should be an economy generator.

 

 

Pray tell, what establishments are there between St. Clair/Ontario and the SE corner of Public Square that would be bypassed?  The restaurants in the Marriott?

 

The point of this would be to connect pedestrians in the Conv. Center to the parts of the City (Euclid, E. 4th) that actually have establishments, and also to tie it to the main rail hub.  The only thing bypassed would be our glorious central traffic islands we generously call Public Square.

 

So we should ingore FUTURE PLANNING?

^Should we be ignoring hypothetical distant future reuses of the Justice Center and old federal building in favor of funneling visitors to consolidate our fledgling successes on lower Euclid?  Yes.

Weather is not an inconvenience. Building tunnels and bridges is ridiculous and a waste.

I don't know. I'm still not sure about the idea. I have strong reservations against it, personally. But that's because I prefer to see lots of pedestrian activity in a city. It gives a city life and energy. It's something that I want downtown Cleveland to have more of because I love Cleveland, and I think it's a fantastic city. I want to see it become more urban, not less, so I immediately get defensive about walkways being proposed. But I'd have to think about it more. My immediate response, though, is no .. I don't like them.

 

In any event, I think we should be careful because I think this is getting dangerously off-topic, perhaps?

Strap, I generally agree with you on UO, but I have to say I think you're way off here.  Creating walkways like the one that connect The Q to Tower City are not what this city should be prescribing for inclament weather.  Creating these portals is the equivalent to getting in your car at point A and driving to point B, caring little about what is in between.  That is the "antiurban" character we are trying to delegitimize.  The best conceived of these constructions may be the passage from the train station in Florence, Italy to an area past the confusion that is Santa Maria Novella Station.  While somewhat interesting with it's low ceilings and off beat retail options, it really is dog sh!t.

Now, if Cleveland had an EXISTING sense of ground level activity that this could add to, I may be all for it.  But it doesn't, and these passageways would do absolutely zero.

I don't want to get too far off topic here, but I'd just like to throw out an idea that popped into my head.  As we think about the design of our future convention center, medical mart, hotels, etc. what if we considered ground floor arcades along the street.  I'm not talking about the completely enclosed kind like our famous arcade.  Think Bologna Italy, or even the Amtrust Building.  This may be an interesting way to entice conventioneers to venture out into the surrounding streets in any weather.  Given the prevalence of crummy weather in our city, I think it's worth thinking about what it's like for people to walk around town.  I know when I'm walking around on my lunch break and it's raining or snowing, I look forward to reaching the protected sidewalks of the Amtrust Building.

To come clean, I'm in no way convinced by the pedestrian passage idea either, but I think it's a great thought experiment. Particularly in regards to a mega project likely to occur on a site that some folks think is too far from other parts of downtown.  With weather like ours, I am not ready to completely toss out the idea of quality, public indoor space.

 

^SolaFide, you totally read my mind.  Bologna (or Mantua) is exactly the picture I have in my head when I wonder why there is so little acknowledgment of our crap weather in Cleveland's streetscape.  Protecting pedestrians from precipitation is not a modern anti-urban invention.

To me weather is a non issue.  Every city has changing weather.  so what is January and Feb is bad.  The remainder of the year is not.

 

Can I ask why weather is such an issue, when other cities with convention centers in worse locations (far away from transit connections or in desolate locations) than the mall?

Weather is a big issue for me. I wouldn't even go to a convention in a cold-weather city, much less venture outside of the hotel/convention center if I had gone. The possibility of having to drive (flying is only slightly better) in bad weather is as much a factor. Combined, those factors keep me away.

 

And if you're wondering how I handle downtown Cleveland in winter -- I don't. This time of the year, I don't go downtown much. I hate the wind first and the cold second. I seldom walk in my neighborhood either. Most of the sidewalks in my neighborhood are impassable and I won't walk in the street. So either I drive to the store or I stay home and wait for the weather to clear so I can drive.

How can you honestly say weather is not an issue?  The weather December thru parts of March is horrific.  That needs to be taken into consideration.  Just because you are tougher than others and it does not bother you, does not mean that everyone is going to sac up.  I think it is foolish to ignore our awful elements. 

 

 

Strap, I generally agree with you on UO, but I have to say I think you're way off here. Creating walkways like the one that connect The Q to Tower City are not what this city should be prescribing for inclament weather. Creating these portals is the equivalent to getting in your car at point A and driving to point B, caring little about what is in between. That is the "antiurban" character we are trying to delegitimize. The best conceived of these constructions may be the passage from the train station in Florence, Italy to an area past the confusion that is Santa Maria Novella Station. While somewhat interesting with it's low ceilings and off beat retail options, it really is dog sh!t.

Now, if Cleveland had an EXISTING sense of ground level activity that this could add to, I may be all for it. But it doesn't, and these passageways would do absolutely zero.

 

Florence's underground passage makes little sense because the weather, at its worst, is too hot.  Cleveland, on the other hand, has pretty crappy weather and an enclosed passage makes more sense.  I do not think that is a good comparison.

How can you honestly say weather is not an issue? The weather December thru parts of March is horrific. That needs to be taken into consideration. Just because you are tougher than others and it does not bother you, does not mean that everyone is going to sac up. I think it is foolish to ignore our awful elements.

 

I agree with KJP and palijandro. With Cleveland being on the lake, the winds downtown are BRUTAL. And if the convention center is placed right smack on the lakefront, there needs to be consideration for it. I don't think I would mind some sort of passageway system as long as it is integrated into downtown as a whole well and isn't only considered a way to siphon people back and forth between the convention center and, say, a parking garage.

 

THAT. Would be horrific.

^For sure.  There are plenty of objective measures by which Cleveland has particularly bad weather for a US city.  And as others have argued, the most conspicuous examples of cold weather cities with convention centers not located near amenities- Chicago and NYC- have so, so many attractions that convenience likely matters less.

Weather is a big issue for me. I wouldn't even go to a convention in a cold-weather city, much less venture outside of the hotel/convention center if I had gone. The possibility of having to drive (flying is only slightly better) in bad weather is as much a factor. Combined, those factors keep me away.

 

And if you're wondering how I handle downtown Cleveland in winter -- I don't. This time of the year, I don't go downtown much. I hate the wind first and the cold second. I seldom walk in my neighborhood either. Most of the sidewalks in my neighborhood are impassable and I won't walk in the street. So either I drive to the store or I stay home and wait for the weather to clear so I can drive.

 

I guess I should have added more.

 

I'm speaking in terms of actually having to attend an event.  You're in the city.

 

How can you honestly say weather is not an issue?  The weather December thru parts of March is horrific.  That needs to be taken into consideration.  Just because you are tougher than others and it does not bother you, does not mean that everyone is going to sac up.  I think it is foolish to ignore our awful elements.

 

Because to me it isn't and my question has nothing to do with me being "tough" so lets not go there.  I'm asking for people's honest opinions, because I feel were focusing on something that is minor in the bigger picture.

 

I'm not ignoring our elements, other cities are in the predicament.

 

^For sure.  There are plenty of objective measures by which Cleveland has particularly bad weather for a US city.  And as others have argued, the most conspicuous examples of cold weather cities with convention centers not located near amenities- Chicago and NYC- have so, so many attractions that convenience likely matters less.

 

Please look at this.  Yes NYC and Chicago have street level convenience, but when the javitz center was first built that street level presence was not there.  Same with Philly.

 

It's almost if you're saying forgot building moment and connecting things so lets build convenience tunnels/bridges.  That way nothing will ever be built because people will then be conditioned to never go outside and by pass potential new establishments.

 

I would think we would stop looking a now and what we don't have and look at the great possibilities to correct and connect the mall site to the WHD, E 4th, North Coast, Tower city and the Galleria area at street level

That wasn't a slight towards you.  Some people deal with the elements well, others do not.  I just believe that some sort of protectant from the elements is a good idea.  For example, I would have no problem making the walk in bad weather.  But at the same time, I know my mom and dad sure as hell would not want to do that, nor would my lady-friend. 

 

I think it is just the wrong mentality to say that because some of us don't mind it, we need not take others into consideration. 

This arguement about weather being an issue and having enclosed walkways is absurd. Cities need vibrancy and energy and people who hunker down and refuse to go outside because it's windy or cold do not add to this at all. I live in San Francisco and the weather here can be horrible, rainy, cold, foggy and people are everywhere no matter what. We don't cry and hide in our houses or drive everywhere because it may be a little uncomfortable. What cry babies you have there. The most fantastic cities in the world have horrible weather and are not concerned about people being exposed to the elements sometimes, they are concerned about much more important things which make their cities alive and full of energy. This would be a complete waste of time. Get in a cab if you don't like the cold. Good Lord.

That wasn't a slight towards you.  Some people deal with the elements well, others do not.  I just believe that some sort of protectant from the elements is a good idea.  For example, I would have no problem making the walk in bad weather.  But at the same time, I know my mom and dad sure as hell would not want to do that, nor would my lady-friend. 

 

I think it is just the wrong mentality to say that because some of us don't mind it, we need not take others into consideration. 

 

And to that, if you or your lady friend were required to attend an event, she would walk or take a cab.  Correct?

 

When she spins money on a cab?  It helps our economy, correct?

 

Who wins?

Weather is a big issue for me. I wouldn't even go to a convention in a cold-weather city, much less venture outside of the hotel/convention center if I had gone. The possibility of having to drive (flying is only slightly better) in bad weather is as much a factor. Combined, those factors keep me away.

 

And if you're wondering how I handle downtown Cleveland in winter -- I don't. This time of the year, I don't go downtown much. I hate the wind first and the cold second. I seldom walk in my neighborhood either. Most of the sidewalks in my neighborhood are impassable and I won't walk in the street. So either I drive to the store or I stay home and wait for the weather to clear so I can drive.

 

I guess I should have added more.

 

I'm speaking in terms of actually having to attend an event. You're in the city.

 

Please see my first paragraph.

I just think it is an amenity that could be added.  I don't think some things should be planned just to hustle out of towners out of money.  It's a 2 block walk or whatever it would be, and I think many would find it annoying to have to throw down $5 for a cab ride.  Then people would be asking "what idiot planned this thing without some consideration for Cleveland's horrific weather."

 

If it will cost an arm and a leg to build something, then do not do it.  But why make people dread coming to the CCC and dealing with the cold and ridiculous amounts of taxi rides?

I think it is just the wrong mentality to say that because some of us don't mind it, we need not take others into consideration. 

 

Especially when it's something meant to ATTRACT people to a city, not drive them away, like a convention center.

 

I mean, I'm personally with MTS. I think people should freaking walk around more. But with this particular project, maybe skywalks need to be considered in a place like Cleveland with a climate like Cleveland's to attract more people to come there. I mean, this project will be intended to bring people, many of them from outside of the region, into the city .. and I think everything should be done to make their stay as welcoming as possible. Frankly, Cleveland can't afford to be callous to those people, and especially since it's a new project, it could quite honestly be taken as a slap in the face to visitors because we know how brutal winters can be there.

 

I don't agree with it. I don't like it. I'm not even advocating that it should be done, necessarily (Maybe it can just be open seasonally?). But if it comes with the cost of attracting less people, I'd rather they just built a covered walkway or a series of tunnels. But again, as long as it connected with someplace like Tower City, where people could at least use public transportation and head to other areas of downtown to spend more time.

This arguement about weather being an issue and having enclosed walkways is absurd. Cities need vibrancy and energy and people who hunker down and refuse to go outside because it's windy or cold do not add to this at all. I live in San Francisco and the weather here can be horrible, rainy, cold, foggy and people are everywhere no matter what. We don't cry and hide in our houses or drive everywhere because it may be a little uncomfortable. What cry babies you have there. The most fantastic cities in the world have horrible weather and are not concerned about people being exposed to the elements sometimes, they are concerned about much more important things which make their cities alive and full of energy. This would be a complete waste of time. Get in a cab if you don't like the cold. Good Lord.

 

I've always wondered how anyone is able to live in the San Franciscan elements.  Tough people they must have there.

Designing a city that takes any attention away from street presence is one that will fail.  I would think that this is obvious with the happenings, of, I don't know, the last 50 years.  If indoor walkways or skyways were a spark for development Akron would be a thriving densly populated metropolis. Having 8 "Walkways to Gateway" will do not a damn thing.  I can't believe we are even talking about this silly topic.

If it's cold outside, put a hat, gloves, and scarf on.  People all over the world do it every day.  If you can't handle the walk to your convention, take a cab.  I as a tax payer am not going to spend millions of dollars to put of roof over your head for 3 blocks.  Underground, above ground, whatever.

I agree that loggias may be an interesting idea for new individual buildings in this city, but the city really doesn't have any control over that.

 

Designing a city that takes any attention away from street presence is one that will fail.  I would think that this is obvious with the happenings, of, I don't know, the last 50 years.  If indoor walkways or skyways were a spark for development Akron would be a thriving densly populated metropolis. Having 8 "Walkways to Gateway" will do not a damn thing.  I can't believe we are even talking about this silly topic.

If it's cold outside, put a hat, gloves, and scarf on.  People all over the world do it every day.  If you can't handle the walk to your convention, take a cab.  I as a tax payer am not going to spend millions of dollars to put of roof over your head for 3 blocks.  Underground, above ground, whatever.

I agree that loggias may be an interesting idea for new individual buildings in this city, but the city really doesn't have any control over that.

 

 

Thank you.

I will say one thing: we're certainly not a group short on opinions.

If indoor walkways or skyways were a spark for development Akron would be a thriving densly populated metropolis.  I as a tax payer am not going to spend millions of dollars to put of roof over your head for 3 blocks.

 

Not one person has said that skyways would be a spark for development.

 

Regarding your taxes, many in Cuyahoga County did not want to pay the increased sales tax to fund a $450 million CC. 

Then why would we waste money to build them?  To save some smuck from Des Moines $3 in cab fare?  People at conventions don't give a damn about cab fare, it's all expensed.

I can guarantee you that tax payers would be even less likely to spend their tax money on skyways, tunnels, and whatever other useless infrastructure being discussed.  And how is Tower City viewed as this mega node in it's current state?  Are we going to see struggling lines of people following eachother through Public Sqaure to the convention center, when it's 27 degrees and a 5 mph wind from the NW?  As a destination why would anything be any differenet than it is right now as far as visitor movement/usage scenarios?  There are arguable more hoetls in a 5 block radius than Tower City.

I agree that loggias may be an interesting idea for new individual buildings in this city, but the city really doesn't have any control over that.

 

The city and county don't have any direct control, but certainly they do own the sidewalks, the convention center site and the Justice Center, and they can help coordinate multiple property owners, so maybe this is something that should be explored.  Though I shudder when I think of some of the cheesy design possibilities.  You'd have to have a serious architect steering that ship.

 

But c'mon, there are definitely examples of vibrant cities with enclosed pedestrian networks.  And plenty of cities without them that are devoid of streetlife.  I think the connection is a lot more tenuous than people make it out to be.  And good god, SF's weather is only lousy if your yardstick is down-peninsula or LA.  I'd throw a party if the worst weather in Cleveland was high forties and foggy.

And good god, SF's weather is only lousy if your yardstick is down-peninsula or LA.  I'd throw a party if the worst weather in Cleveland was high forties and foggy.

 

hahah

I agree with MTS here.  If people are already here for a convention, the lack of enclosed walkways is not going to prevent them from actually attending the event.  To me, the question is whether having these is considered important to the people planning the event.  These people might not even put Cleveland on the list in bad weather months, regardless of whether we have enclosed walkways.  In addition, even if they do attract a few more conventions a year, would the negative impact these tunnels would have on street life the other 9 months of the year be worth it? 

I agree with MTS here.  If people are already here for a convention, the lack of enclosed walkways is not going to prevent them from actually attending the event.  To me, the question is whether having these is considered important to the people planning the event.  These people might not even put Cleveland on the list in bad weather months, regardless of whether we have enclosed walkways.  In addition, even if they do attract a few more conventions a year, would the negative impact these tunnels would have on street life the other 9 months of the year be worth it? 

 

Exactly.  Look at Houston Tx. They have virtually no downtown street activity.  Why.  Most people use the decrepit tunnel system. 

And good god, SF's weather is only lousy if your yardstick is down-peninsula or LA. I'd throw a party if the worst weather in Cleveland was high forties and foggy.

 

Would you throw a party is it was high forties and foggy all year long? 

 

Walkways yield the suburban equivalent of an urban area.  See Las Vegas.

 

 

I don't think I am asking for the catacombs or anything.  Just possible protection from our bad weather.  I find it ironic that we all seek to promote and utilize the positive aspects of Cleveland (ie. the lake), yet not try to compensate for some of its negatives (ie. weather).  I repeat, I do not want some Ninja Turtle Sewer System.  And, if the cost is too much, then do not do it.  But if there is a way to offer a little comfort from the elements for the out of towners, then I say do it.

we shouldn't be concerned about those out of towner as they probably come from cities where the weather changes as well.

Exactly.  Look at Houston Tx. They have virtually no downtown street activity.  Why.  Most people use the decrepit tunnel system. 

 

OK, we can trade examples and counter examples back and forth all day, but I suspect that's not going to convince anyone.  I'm not aware of any remotely scientific evidence that enclosed ped connections = lower street activity.

 

I agree with MTS here.  If people are already here for a convention, the lack of enclosed walkways is not going to prevent them from actually attending the event.  To me, the question is whether having these is considered important to the people planning the event.  These people might not even put Cleveland on the list in bad weather months, regardless of whether we have enclosed walkways.  In addition, even if they do attract a few more conventions a year, would the negative impact these tunnels would have on street life the other 9 months of the year be worth it? 

 

I think these are the right questions.  And one other unwelcome possibility: is it possible that the convention center-MM-new convention hotel becomes its own enclosed super center of restaurants and half-assed retail because event planners prefer having those amenities on-site?  That wouldn't exactly improve downtown's vibrancy either.

For people complaint about hotels and tunnels, I'm sure it would not be difficult to connect both the Marriott and Sheridan to the facility underground.

 

Does anyone know if they are currently?

For people complaint about hotels and tunnels, I'm sure it would not be difficult to connect both the Marriott and Sheridan to the facility underground.

 

Does anyone know if they are currently?

 

Sheridan (Sheraton)?  Do you mean the Crowne Plaza? 

 

IIRC, the CP has a connection to PH.

I can't believe we are even talking about this silly topic.

If it's cold outside, put a hat, gloves, and scarf on.  People all over the world do it every day. 

 

And us wimps still spend the same color money as you hardy fools. Plus, there are many more wimps south of I-70 than north of it. If you want us to come to your town and spend money, accommodate us.

Your response just shows how little you know about San Francisco weather and how brutal it can be. Outside of that I travel all over the world and like some people have stated in this thread, the most vibrant exciting urban enticing cities have horrible weather and they are not concerned or wasting their time with connecting their buildings with covered walk ways! You are just making Cleveland suburban and that notion is just nauseating. You all have to know that the younger generation do not care about this issue at all. We don't look at weather as a reason not to visit a city. We look at what is exciting and fun about a city and could give a rat's ass if they had covered walk ways so I didn't have to venture outside. This is one more reason Cleveland has issues getting things done, they can't see the forest through the trees and aren't willing to give us something for the good and long term benefit of the city.

I think these are the right questions.  And one other unwelcome possibility: is it possible that the convention center-MM-new convention hotel becomes its own enclosed super center of restaurants and half-assed retail because event planners prefer having those amenities on-site?

 

WHAT?!?!?

 

You mean, like Tower City? :)

I can't believe we are even talking about this silly topic.

If it's cold outside, put a hat, gloves, and scarf on.  People all over the world do it every day.

 

And us wimps still spend the same color money as you hardy fools. Plus, there are many more wimps south of I-70 than north of it. If you want us to come to your town and spend money, accommodate us.

 

Then tell that to NYC, Boston, Miami, Houston and any other place with a convention center not nearly connected to the center of the CBD as Cleveland's Mall Site.

Your response just shows how little you know about San Francisco weather and how brutal it can be. Outside of that I travel all over the world and like some people have stated in this thread, the most vibrant exciting urban enticing cities have horrible weather and they are not concerned or wasting their time with connecting their buildings with covered walk ways! You are just making Cleveland suburban and that notion is just nauseating. You all have to know that the younger generation do not care about this issue at all. We don't look at weather as a reason not to visit a city. We look at what is exciting and fun about a city and could give a rat's ass if they had covered walk ways so I didn't have to venture outside. This is one more reason Cleveland has issues getting things done, they can't see the forest through the trees and aren't willing to give us something for the good and long term benefit of the city.

 

Montreal = urban metropolis = tons of underground passages.  When you're finished traveling the world, I recommend you check it out some time. 

 

 

I really didn't mean to start a firestorm here and hope we can all be chill here.  For example, sfbob, I am offering a topic for debate from the safety of my office in New York, and by doing so, I am most certainly not "making Cleveland suburban."  And I really don't consider myself "one more reason Cleveland has issues getting things done."  Though I do appreciate your enthusiasm for this topic.

 

Your response just shows how little you know about San Francisco weather and how brutal it can be. Outside of that I travel all over the world and like some people have stated in this thread, the most vibrant exciting urban enticing cities have horrible weather and they are not concerned or wasting their time with connecting their buildings with covered walk ways! You are just making Cleveland suburban and that notion is just nauseating. You all have to know that the younger generation do not care about this issue at all. We don't look at weather as a reason not to visit a city. We look at what is exciting and fun about a city and could give a rat's ass if they had covered walk ways so I didn't have to venture outside. This is one more reason Cleveland has issues getting things done, they can't see the forest through the trees and aren't willing to give us something for the good and long term benefit of the city.

 

Montreal = urban metropolis = tons of underground passages.  When you're finished traveling the world, I recommend you check it out some time. 

 

 

 

Why were those malls built?

Good for them. I won't go to any city north of I-70. I'm not alone. And the only city in that list with weather as bad as Cleveland's is Boston. I'm sorry my wimpyness offends you. But I didn't choose to be this way anymore than you chose to be tall, Latino or gay. I am sensitive to you. Be sensitive to me.