Historic designation rejected for Civic Arena

[BrianTH]

Ah, the conjunction of segregationism and preservationism, which I suppose is to be expected in this case.

Ignoring the other parts of the Hill for the moment, the reason to make this site as continuous as possible with Downtown is to maximize its value as a development site. Downtown doesn't have many sites like this directly adjacent to it, and we should make a point of getting the most out of each of them.

As for the rest of the Hill, there are no real natural barriers between this site and the rest of the Hill, other than the grade, so it isn't analogous to cases where such natural barriers exist. Generally, the Hill as a whole is really all in close proximity to Downtown, and the Hill as a whole has lots of redevelopment potential, so there is no reason to treat any of it as unimportant, and that means trying to connect all of it to Downtown as directly and efficiently as possible.

[szug-bot]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Ah, the conjunction of segregationism and preservationism, which I suppose is to be expected in this case.

no, no one has suggested 'segregationism'.

[MathmanMathman]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Ah, the conjunction of segregationism and preservationism, which I suppose is to be expected in this case.

I think it was there from the start although it doesn't look as if the Hill residents will have a return of their neighborhood as things seem to be going in the "gentrification" direction.

Ignoring the other parts of the Hill for the moment, the reason to make this site as continuous as possible with Downtown is to maximize its value as a development site. Downtown doesn't have many sites like this directly adjacent to it, and we should make a point of getting the most out of each of them.

As for the rest of the Hill, there are no real natural barriers between this site and the rest of the Hill, other than the grade, so it isn't analogous to cases where such natural barriers exist. Generally, the Hill as a whole is really all in close proximity to Downtown, and the Hill as a whole has lots of redevelopment potential, so there is no reason to treat any of it as unimportant, and that means trying to connect all of it to Downtown as directly and efficiently as possible.

As I said before, I-579 will defeat any effort to knit the area to downtown. It's more of a barrier than the Civic Arena ever was. I haven't heard of anything with the Civic Arena proposal that even addresses this issue. Only a wide build-over park will do it as I doubt they'll remove the highway.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

no, no one has suggested 'segregationism'.

That specific comment wasn't in reference to your post. To the extent I was responding to your post, it was more the stuff at the end about the lack of natural barriers. In retrospect all that was less than clear, so I apologize for that.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by MathmanMathman

I think it was there from the start although it doesn't look as if the Hill residents will have a return of their neighborhood as things seem to be going in the "gentrification" direction.

Well, Crawford Square was successfully mixed-income, and people from the Hill have been getting jobs at Consol. So while it won't be the same as the neighborhood that once existed there, I don't think it will necessarily be discontinuous with the Hill either.

As I said before, I-579 will defeat any effort to knit the area to downtown. It's more of a barrier than the Civic Arena ever was. I haven't heard of anything with the Civic Arena proposal that even addresses this issue. Only a wide build-over park will do it as I doubt they'll remove the highway.

Again, a deck-park between the bridges was part of the original Penguins' proposal.

[SteelCityRising]

Cough...BIG DIG...cough!

[BrianTH]

Something like the Big Dig would be nice, but obviously the cost would be horrendous, and if that kind of money was available I'd rather spend it on projects that would benefit both the Hill and the City in general (such as a subway from Downtown to Oakland via the Hill, or my proposed urban gondola system, or so on).

The deck park, on the other hand, should only cost a few tens of millions (using a similar project in Dallas as a guide). It can't be too wide because the further north you go, the gap between Downtown and the Hill is growing, and the Hill is gaining in elevation relative to Downtown. But of course that was true prior to the Crosstown as well--the primary connections between the Hill and Downtown funneled down to the same area because of the topography. And if you put the Crosstown in a tunnel (ala the Big Dig), you would just recreate that issue. So if you deck the part they are talking about, you've really gone most of the way toward what can be done.