How about routing all the buses along Prospect behind TT?  I would think that corridor has enough curbside to accommodate the # of buses we are looking to relocate

I don't doubt that closing Ontario and Superior through the square will give Joe C big headaches and slow down RTAs performance, but of course there are ways to re-route the buses.  Once the east side transit center is open, it might even be easier, not sure.

 

the biggest problem for any bus rerouting is a viable north-south route.  the east west buses could fairly easily be moved onto prospect or st clair, but there is a fair amount of service north of public square where a bus will loop around near major buildings before returning through the square.

 

also, i think that RTA might be on board if there was a way to show some operational cost savings.  as it is now, everyone is basicallys saying "just add 5 minutes to the route and go this way instead."  that might work well for 1 bus or 1 car, but for hundreds of buses a day, this would add up quickly - again assuming that the existing system needs to be kept.

 

The now open east side transit center, a planned west side transit center, and the 3C project, a public square redesign would provide additional justification for reviewing the entire RTA downtown network.

I don't deny that it turns residents and out-of-towners off.  I think we have made some steps to curb the panhandling with the yellow boxes and a general shift in the attitude of people towards beggers.  Aggressive panhandlers need to be targeted.  I personally welcome the ones who are at least doing something for the money (like the guy who plays music outside the Q).

 

Please, please, please, don't confuse street performance with panhandling.  One adds to the urban environment, one takes away from it.

 

Street performance???? Doesn't that need a permit?  I think whether it adds to an urban environment is a matter of opinion.  Not saying that I don't appreciate it nor am I commenting on it as an art form.  Just saying not everyone sees it as an enhancement to an urban environment. 

Street performance???? Doesn't that need a permit?  I think whether it adds to an urban environment is a matter of opinion.  Not saying that I don't appreciate it nor am I commenting on it as an art form.  Just saying not everyone sees it as an enhancement to an urban environment. 

 

Street performances have been since ancient times.  I fail to see how anyone could be bothered by them (especially those playing violins or trumpets).  There's no comparison between a street performer and a beggar.  Do you think MorrisonDance adds to the urban environment?

 

By the way, no, you don't need a permit to be a street performer.

 

"In the United States under Constitutional Law and most European common law, the protection of artistic free speech extends to busking. In the USA and most places, the designated places for free speech behavior are the public parks, streets, sidewalks, thoroughfares and town squares or plazas. Under certain circumstances even private property may be open to buskers, particularly if it is open to the general public and busking does not interfere with its function and management allows it or other forms of free speech behaviors or has a history of doing so."

 

I think it's a shame that street performers get lumped in with agressive panhandlers nowadays.

I love the guy with the sax. Anyone notice the younger white kid with the guitar, he believe he is a new one

Street performance???? Doesn't that need a permit?  I think whether it adds to an urban environment is a matter of opinion.  Not saying that I don't appreciate it nor am I commenting on it as an art form.  Just saying not everyone sees it as an enhancement to an urban environment. 

 

I think it's a shame that street performers get lumped in with agressive panhandlers nowadays.

 

I agree.  I will always give money to street performers.  Panhandlers I mostly want to punch in the face.  The difference being one is actually doing something to earn money while the other is just being a worthless bum.

And then that brings up the issue of the "window washers".... and the need for a separate thread ;)

 

I'm leaving this thread with my belief that Public Square doesn't need a total makeover.  It needs some TLC from the City and some appreciation from the public.

 

As for the issues recently discussed, I am going to build on something EC said in regards to dilluting those issues.  If PS had the type of activity it should, the bums and 'undesirable' youths would not be so noticeable to those who are bothered by them.

^Fair enough, I guess I just disagree with your first conclusion.  Even if there were no panhandlers or annoying kids, I still think PS would be a crap public space.  It would still be four, modestly-sized, distinct quadrants, each surrounded on all sides by multiple lanes of roadway, sidewalks, bus shelters and waiting bus riders.  Which is why total remake proposals have been around for decades.  The fact that is used to be well-used in its current configuration doesn't really move me.

I just think the malls have more potential, thats why I dont believe the square needs a total makeover. And I wasn't really a fan of any of them, the thread it was cool but doesn't seem realistic.

While I think some general improvements in cleanliness, landscaping, street cleaning, etc would help, I do think the core issue is Public Square is acting as a bus terminal without actually being a bus terminal.  It's more a bunch of street corners with lots of bus stops around it.

 

If there was an actual bus terminal with waiting areas, large bus lanes, etc that would be an improvement.  It would keep masses of people from clogging up the sidewalks and masses of busses causing congestion on the street.  There's certainly plenty of space to build a legit bus/transit station in any of the surface lots near Public Square.

 

I just don't think Public Sqaure is equipped to be both a bus station and a public space.  You need to commit to it being one or the other.

Exactly one or the other. And it will most likely remain a bus station.

I think part of that sentiment is the stigma against buses and their ridership.  If, for instance, PS was like it once was with Streetcars gliding through there, I don't think we would even be having this discussion.

 

BTW, this - http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/8/2009/2009-ohio-6313.pdf - is the case I was referencing earlier about cleaning up public square and why the DCA is not allowed to do so.

While I think some general improvements in cleanliness, landscaping, street cleaning, etc would help, I do think the core issue is Public Square is acting as a bus terminal without actually being a bus terminal.  It's more a bunch of street corners with lots of bus stops around it.

 

If there was an actual bus terminal with waiting areas, large bus lanes, etc that would be an improvement.  It would keep masses of people from clogging up the sidewalks and masses of busses causing congestion on the street.  There's certainly plenty of space to build a legit bus/transit station in any of the surface lots near Public Square.

 

I just don't think Public Sqaure is equipped to be both a bus station and a public space.  You need to commit to it being one or the other.

 

I agree with everything you said except your last sentence.  I really think that with a proper bus terminal, Public Square could serve both purposes well.  There is enough space.  The problem is that its all just one big mess right now, without clear separation of where to wait for buses, where to walk if you're passing through, and where to hang out and relax.  I think it's akin to a really wide street without lane markings or sidewalks.  You get people driving all over and walking all over and its just a mess, even if there's enough room for everyone to do their own thing if it were properly organized.

Just move all of the busses to the northwest quadrant and free up the other 3 for the public walking through or relaxing.

I think part of that sentiment is the stigma against buses and their ridership. If, for instance, PS was like it once was with Streetcars gliding through there, I don't think we would even be having this discussion.

 

You might be right about some people, but this discussion predates streetcars even: http://ech.cwru.edu/ech-cgi/article.pl?id=FWOPS

By "we"... I meant UO ;)  Good find though.

I bet many people on hear would oppose this but it could possibly work. Cut the Northwest Quadrant in two and put a bus only lane on it.

 

This is the worst rendering ever so dont laugh

 

And could you put something like this over ontario or superior, or even from the corner of the southwest quad to the bottom corner of the north east quad.

 

Regardless of the trash/noise/etc. issues, I feel Public Square is uninviting mainly because of the land usage.  The space is large between the surrounding buildings, but much of it is not usable by people.  Here are some numbers I calculated using an area measurement tool on Google Maps (all numbers are in square feet):

 

Inside Outer Sidewalks

Roadway Area/Total Area

201000/355000

 

Total Area Between Buildings (or parking lot on NW quadrant)

442038

 

Roadway Area

218278

 

Park Area (not all of it usable)

NW: 25553

NE: 29801

SE: 30740

SW: 22101

Total: 108195

 

Sidewalk Area

115565

 

Outer Sidewalk Area

69760

 

Inner Sidewalk Area

45805

 

That's way too much roadway for it to be a functional park, especially given that the roadway splits the area into 4 separate parks.

I completely agree that the design is the issue. It is a bunch of corridors separated by curbs and seating walls. On all sides, you are surrounded by traffic. Where is one actually supposed to sit and enjoy themselves? Sure there are some benches in the northern quadrants, but the space is so small, cramped and mis-oriented that it just does not lend itself to being a place where one would like to relax.  It is too segmented. Sure keeping it clean and free of "undesireables would help. But would you still go down there and want to sit in any of the quadrants? 

Make it 1 big park but shrink the outer edge of it enough to add an extra lane and route all traffic around the outside of the square (square-a-bout?).  One way traffic flow.  Outer most lane can be for buses all the way around.

Isn't Superior through Public Square part of Route 6, aka Grand Army of the Republic Highway?  I wonder if there are any Federal Regulation that would hinder efforts to redirect traffic and/or close that street completely.

Yes, I believe I've heard that Superior cannot be cut off because it is a US route (unless the federal government reroutes it).  Also, Ontario is a US route (422) up to Superior.

Is it difficult to get the allowance to modify a route?

I completely agree that the design is the issue. It is a bunch of corridors separated by curbs and seating walls. On all sides, you are surrounded by traffic. Where is one actually supposed to sit and enjoy themselves? Sure there are some benches in the northern quadrants, but the space is so small, cramped and mis-oriented that it just does not lend itself to being a place where one would like to relax.  It is too segmented. Sure keeping it clean and free of "undesireables would help. But would you still go down there and want to sit in any of the quadrants? 

 

I agree, the current design...allowing all the traffic to intersect is not the best by any means...However, the design is not the ONLY issue. People still used it for decades to come and relax and sit in its current format....But when unsavory situations are or have been allowed to escalate and make it a permanent camp, it deters a lot of leisure people/possible events we'd like to see like families and "ice cream" socials. I see lots of unsavories sitting down enjoying themselves in its current format. There was also fight early on in its history that opposed the dissection of traffic through it...but again, in its history, it was still heavily used for a meeting place. So, having said that...The uninviting feeling today, IMO, has more to do with the current element and perception, more so than the actual design. At the end of the day it is a lot of both.

 

Why does it seem like taboo to simply fess up to this obvious deterrent.

:roll: Show me one post that has denied it being a deterrent. 

:roll: Show me one post that has denied it being a deterrent. 

 

Well, you're usually the first to deny or jump all over something I point out which may demand more or better...or accountability. Maybe denying it is not the best way to put it... How about "downplaying" it. And, said deterrent being proposed as second to design, I would say is downplaying the issue...intentional or not. All I am saying in the shortest summary is that I am NOT opposed to a better design...but not without strict attention to the current problems, that left unabated, I see will carry over to any new design, no matter how nice.

"Downplay" your views, EC?  No, no.... nobody ever does that around here. 

 

Let's just clear it up.  The fact that homeless people and black youths are in the square is a deterrent.  That's undisputed.  It deters most of the general public and most out of town visitors from enjoying the square.  Now with that out of the way, let's talk about how a re-design / re-purpose / whatever can somehow deter the 'undesirables' away from public square so it can become a vibrant urban setting once again.

Let's not make this into a race issue by acknowledging race. Not one time did I mention race/socio-economic status. I could care less what flavor anyone is or how many homes they have or do not have, or money for that matter... If their behavior is unacceptable...its unacceptable, period--And, it should be dealt with appropriately, as no one gets a free pass to act un-accordingly because of their race, etc. If they did, such would simply draw negative attention to that particular group as others soon see that rules apply to some but not others. So, let's not go the direction of race because to assume I dislike the situations at P.S. because of race/socio-economic status would be a quite prejudiced assumption and insulting.

 

 

I would be offering up the same ideas if the setting were a suburban mall in the far burbs where it would likely be Caucasian youths involved in the scenarios that go down at the square. So, I am an equal opportunity frowner on any issue that involves acts that spoil the square or become the proverbial "turd-in-the-punchbowl" no matter who or what it is involved.

 

Ok, how to deter the situations? I made some suggestions, however I doubt they will come to fruition, because for sure, someone will eventually pull a race card or "you're picking on the poor" card, or whatever other excuse card exists.. if, for example, I suggest moving these bus stops. (just one idea...and would still suggest it no matter who was riding transit because I don't like the idea of having all the hulking transit invading the town green)

 

I have suggested the presence of on-foot patrol on the quadrants when possible, but that may not happen because of the "we lack the resources" issue...and if the police DID actually attempt to curtail the behavior that is a deterrent on the square...we will eventually get right back to where we started by someone turning this into an issue where the police are "picking on".... what/whomever. So, how do you win? This cannot be both ways.

 

 

How about a little imaginary experiment...let's imagine all bus stops away from this area and it used as just an events area and park. Add to this, an enforcement on aggressive panhandling and/or vagrancy/loitering....which would all likely result in a reduction of the litter/yelling and hollering as well and other connected behaviors, or lack-thereof.

 

Moreover....How about a reduction of panhandlers right outside of businesses ready to target people with a money beg. Let's just suppose this were reduced by taking some basic pro-active community action against a lot of the kind of behavior that is illegal in the first place. So no, it is not becoming a dictatorship..rather, just enforcing existing rules/laws. (and I did not mention passing the hand....which I have witnessed several times on dark parts of Ontario...near enough to the square.) Do you suppose...Just maybe.... it just might become a more desirable place instantly if said issues were curtailed?

 

My conclusion, and although I support a re-design eventually, feel it is not going to have the impact it can have if these issues are not dealt with first to make what we have the best it can be. If the redesign employs the art of creating a central transit area away from the square just enough to keep the current issues associated with it at bay and from being an issue in all areas of it, then let's go with it. Its not just people behaving anti-socially that is an issue, it is the hulking noise and fumes of all the buses. From a pedestrian standpoint wanting to relax in the park....such is not conducive to making such an experience the best quality it can be.

 

 

As a former small shop keeper, I would sure as hell welcome the smaller changes first. I would hate to see a new square with the same old patronage and unabated current issues.

Make it 1 big park but shrink the outer edge of it enough to add an extra lane and route all traffic around the outside of the square (square-a-bout?).  One way traffic flow.  Outer most lane can be for buses all the way around.

 

I was for this idea until I realized there were 32 bus stops in Public Square.  So now imagine all the bus stops on Superior and Ontario in Public Square being moved to the perimeter.  It would be a wall of bus stops and buses.  And talk about "running the gauntlet" now.  You'd have to bust through a wall of people to get to the square.

 

It's the bus stops that are holding us back.  It's RTA that's holding this back.  People that walk through Public Square now do it out of necessity.  Even if you make it more appealing, without solving the bus problem I don't see massive amounts of people suddenly hanging out there anymore than I see people having their lunch in the Greyhound station.

Make it 1 big park but shrink the outer edge of it enough to add an extra lane and route all traffic around the outside of the square (square-a-bout?).  One way traffic flow.  Outer most lane can be for buses all the way around.

That's why I suggest prospect for all the buses. There is plenty of room back

there.

 

I was for this idea until I realized there were 32 bus stops in Public Square.  So now imagine all the bus stops on Superior and Ontario in Public Square being moved to the perimeter.  It would be a wall of bus stops and buses.  And talk about "running the gauntlet" now.  You'd have to bust through a wall of people to get to the square.

 

It's the bus stops that are holding us back.  It's RTA that's holding this back.  People that walk through Public Square now do it out of necessity.  Even if you make it more appealing, without solving the bus problem I don't see massive amounts of people suddenly hanging out there anymore than I see people having their lunch in the Greyhound station.

A transit station in the WHD may house those busses, and give RTA riders a better enviroment to wait for their bus.

 

This is something I hope the new Group plan is looking into.

By its very shape, a public square is a perfect transit hub, especially one as large as Cleveland's Public Square. This has been the situation since the earliest streetcar days. Having a single location downtown where all the buses come together make it easy for transfers and unless a better site is built, Public Square will naturally be the point of convergence for RTA bus and rail routes.

 

Like it or not, but it is a "public" square for everyone, including the homeless, young minorities, or people who don't look/act like sanitized suburbanites. And if you don't like how certain members of the public behave, then ask for better policing and/or become more tolerant that cities are where all types of people come together.

Make it 1 big park but shrink the outer edge of it enough to add an extra lane and route all traffic around the outside of the square (square-a-bout?). One way traffic flow. Outer most lane can be for buses all the way around.

 

I was for this idea until I realized there were 32 bus stops in Public Square. So now imagine all the bus stops on Superior and Ontario in Public Square being moved to the perimeter. It would be a wall of bus stops and buses. And talk about "running the gauntlet" now. You'd have to bust through a wall of people to get to the square.

 

It's the bus stops that are holding us back. It's RTA that's holding this back. People that walk through Public Square now do it out of necessity. Even if you make it more appealing, without solving the bus problem I don't see massive amounts of people suddenly hanging out there anymore than I see people having their lunch in the Greyhound station.

 

You wouldn't have to "run the gauntlet if there were concourses comming up under the perimiter into th square and I don't think it would be that hard.  I have seen preliminary TT drawings showing an entrance into TT from withing the square below grade.  I know that the street in front of TT is a bridge and that there are spaces in the TT concourse level that go up to the wall of this bridge.  On the diametric opposide corner is Key tower and Mall A which is an underground parking garage.  Thus, the hole on that side has already been dug.  I am sure someone here knows more about this than I do.  It would solve all the problems of burrying Superior, closing Ontario and making all the traffic go around the perimiter.  People could get into the square under the perimiter with big open ramps, two of which are already almost done. 

 

comments please

Congrats on post 1000

Street performance???? Doesn't that need a permit?  I think whether it adds to an urban environment is a matter of opinion.  Not saying that I don't appreciate it nor am I commenting on it as an art form.  Just saying not everyone sees it as an enhancement to an urban environment. 

 

Street performances have been since ancient times.  I fail to see how anyone could be bothered by them (especially those playing violins or trumpets).  There's no comparison between a street performer and a beggar.  Do you think MorrisonDance adds to the urban environment?

 

By the way, no, you don't need a permit to be a street performer.

 

"In the United States under Constitutional Law and most European common law, the protection of artistic free speech extends to busking. In the USA and most places, the designated places for free speech behavior are the public parks, streets, sidewalks, thoroughfares and town squares or plazas. Under certain circumstances even private property may be open to buskers, particularly if it is open to the general public and busking does not interfere with its function and management allows it or other forms of free speech behaviors or has a history of doing so."

 

I think it's a shame that street performers get lumped in with agressive panhandlers nowadays.

 

Thanks for the clarity on the permit.  I'm not lumping them in with panhandlers.  What I am saying is that people can find them not so charming and perhaps just as annoying as panhandlers.  The reality is that the city itself does not have a large enough population to support businesses in the city.  If we want those businesses to survive we need to bring people down town.  To do that we need to recognize that if people are afraid to come in to town then we cannot turn a blind eye to their perceptions and figure out how best to deal with that. Not saying they should go away, just that we need to be realistic.

Thanks for the clarity on the permit. I'm not lumping them in with panhandlers. What I am saying is that people can find them not so charming and perhaps just as annoying as panhandlers. The reality is that the city itself does not have a large enough population to support businesses in the city. If we want those businesses to survive we need to bring people down town. To do that we need to recognize that if people are afraid to come in to town then we cannot turn a blind eye to their perceptions and figure out how best to deal with that. Not saying they should go away, just that we need to be realistic.

 

Well, saying they're as annoying as panhandlers seems to be lumping them together to me.  I suppose I can understand (although I don't agree) why some people would be a little afraid or weary of street performers, but I really don't understand how anyone could consider them as annoying as panhandlers.  They are not aggressive about asking you for money.  They are minding their own business, creating art, and if you like it you can go over and give them a donation.  I don't see it being much different than walking past artwork in a window.  I have never seen a street performer get up in someone's face or try to be intimidating or follow someone like some panhandlers may do at times.  They're too busy performing and they're minding their own business.  If you don't want to donate you just mind your own business as well.  There's no forced interaction like with a panhandler.

Like it or not, but it is a "public" square for everyone, including the homeless, young minorities, or people who don't look/act like sanitized suburbanites. And if you don't like how certain members of the public behave, then ask for better policing and/or become more tolerant that cities are where all types of people come together.

 

Careful.  This line of common sense could be interpreted as playing the race card...

Thank you KJP for the most thoughtful, insightful and well reasoned post on this recent topic.

 

My two cents...let's wait for the commission but anything "major" will top 8 figures and even minor tweaks (with which nobody will be happy) will cost 30-40 million.  This $$$ will be hard to come by and quite frankly will not be considered a priority by most, no matter what people like us argue or think.  Sorry to sound so negative.

Some street performers are as bad as panhandlers, especially that guy who follows people around E4 and sings/raps alongside you at night, and then gets angry when you don't pay.

 

Just because a hussler is doing actively something doesn't make him a street performer

 

Musicians are under a different category to me. People who can actually play an instrument, not rap and pretend to be a street performer

Like it or not, but it is a "public" square for everyone, including the homeless, young minorities, or people who don't look/act like sanitized suburbanites. And if you don't like how certain members of the public behave, then ask for better policing and/or become more tolerant that cities are where all types of people come together.

 

Careful.  This line of common sense could be interpreted as playing the race card...

 

Well yeah sure, but unfortunately, and here lies the problem, that we are beyond the tipping point for "everyone", where it so beyond/predominantly homeless, panhandlers and whatnot that there will never be a feeling that "everyone" is welcome (when the accidental or occasional "everyone" else basically gets chased away by the mentioned few that do inhabit the area). 

 

While the current spectacle remains the same, and until the rest of the population doesnt feel threatened by the regular inhabitants of the square then there certainly wont be any feeling that "everyone" is welcome (except maybe during the July 4th or Christmas events).   

 

 

I've never seen a homeless person chasing a member of the public away from Public Square.

 

But seriously, I agree with your general thought process as it pertains to other people's feelings of being 'threatened' on the square.  It's unfortunate.  But it's reality.  That said, whether you 'feel' welcome and whether you 'are' welcome are two totally different things.  Everyone is welcome on public square.  There is no law, ordinance, whatever preventing you from enjoying it.  Contrary to popular opinion it seems, even the homeless people 'want' you there.  If you don't go, who are they going to ask/harrass for money?  I just wish it didn't have to be an either/or situation.... meaning, to make you feel welcome, I wish we didn't have to make other members of the public feel unwelcome to this public space.

 

I'll say it again, dillution of the perceived problem, not elimination, is the only realistic, legal, and civilized method of correction.  And, in this context, I am limiting the "problem" to LEGAL, albeit undesirable to Joe and Susie Strongsville and others, activity.  Littering and other criminal action (note - simple loitering and panhandling are not illegal, and laws which aim to prohibit the same have consistently been declared offensive to our constitution).

The homeless/panhandling problem is not a "perceived" problem, it's a real one.  When I took the rapid, I was approached by at least 3 panhandlers each way crossing the square. Now that I drive, I am approached by 2.  This is on a completely other part of the square. 

I cross the square several times a week and rarely get asked for money (maybe you need to stop looking so nice and giving, RR ;)).  Every now and then, yes.  But it's not a problem to me.  I just say no and continue walking.  Same thing I say when I am in NYC or DC or LA or Chicago.... anywhere else you may run into homeless people.  Same thing my wife says and she deals with it just fine.  For it to truly bother me, that would be a subjective feeling, a perception personal to me.  It annoys me when they ask more than once or if they approach when I am eating or talking on my phone.  Then they get a piece of my mind.  But that's rare.  To say something is "perceived" does not say it isn't so. 

Yeah I suppose it is both, but there is definitely a real problem.  I have had numerous occasions crossing the square with out of towners or nieces and nephews, and either being aggressively accosted or just didn't want my little nephew see people peeing in public, etc...  Its easier just to avoid it altogether.

 

When my DC friends have been there, they have been overwhelmed by things, even though we have seen worse in DC, it just doesnt stand out as much here.

 

I suppose the perceived problem is the others that are afraid of the all the people eating their "meals" out there and all the trash they leave. 

I worked downtown for 25 years and I am sure I was approached by panhandlers all over downtown in that time period 5000-6000 times (no exaggeration..my job had me walking around at all times of the day).  Some how I survived and certainly NEVER felt threatened (and rarely gave money).

 

And believe it or not approached by panhanlders in New York (on 5th Ave in Midtown), DC (and then some), San Fransico, Chicago, Boston, Atlanta and Miami.  I also survived all of that.

I worked downtown for 25 years and I am sure I was approached by panhandlers all over downtown in that time period 5000-6000 times (no exaggeration..my job had me walking around at all times of the day).  Some how I survived and certainly NEVER felt threatened (and rarely gave money).

 

And believe it or not approached by panhanlders in New York (on 5th Ave in Midtown), DC (and then some), San Fransico, Chicago, Boston, Atlanta and Miami.  I also survived all of that.

 

Good post, I think that gets to the point of it.  Panhandlers are an annoyance, but are very rarely a threat.  They elicit a disproportionate response of fear from many people for one reason or another.  This is exactly why I agree with Hts121 that the best way to "deal" with the "problem" is to dilute it.  When downtown is very busy, the panhandlers (like day after Thanksgiving, July 4th, etc.) are still there but the non-panhandlers outnumber them by so much they get lost in the shuffle and your chance (individually) of being asked for money goes way down.  Add to that the safety in numbers feeling most people get, and downtown seems so much more safe even with the panhandlers still there.

it just doesnt stand out as much here. 

 

And that is probably because of dillution.  More people on the street just makes the homeless less noticeable.  Question - when I was a kid and went to DC, I remember being overwhelmed by the homeless presence.  And it just wasn't lazy bums, but people who looked in true despair with severe disformities, etc.  What did DC do?  Or is this still a 'problem' today?

I lived in Cleveland and encountered pan handlers

I lived in Columbus and encountered pan handlers

I lived in Chicago and encountered pan handlers

I lived in Jackson, MS and encountered pan handlers

I lived in Shanghai and encountered pan handlers

 

The point is, panhandlers are in every city, and they tend to hang out in the busiest parts of town.  If we improve PS and the mall, the odds of eliminating pan handlers are slim to none.

 

 

 

OK, so it happens everywhere, they are harmless, and we should just get over it.

 

I can feel Public Square getting busier already  :roll: