AntiRust

This Backwater Burgh: Why Living in a City Smaller than New York Might Not Actually Suck

Boy, living in Pittsburgh sucks. Right? New York has all that fashion stuff and those pretty people. And what do we have? A crappy old arena that can't attract concerts anymore.

OK. So that last one was always a load of rubbish and continues to be. But you get my point. Big cities just have more "excitement" and "buzz."

Which is undoubtedly true. But does it really matter? A guy named Mark Oppenheimer has been generating some chatter with a pretty sharp article entitled Medium Town: On living in a city smaller than New York. Oppenheimer grew up in Springfield, Mass. He currently lives in New Haven. He argues that smaller cities of that ilk are good for people. Especially writers.

Cool.

So the next time you hear someone complaining that he can't get anyone to read his masterpiece because he's stuck here in this artistic backwater... Tell him to go pack sand. (Unless it's me complaining in that fashion.)

I would only add that I knew Oppenheimer very tangentially in my university days. He was in my residential college and a year behind me. He seemed quite an intelligent fellow.

Drink Straub: The New Local Beer is the Old Local Beer

Fans of "local beer" took a hit when Rolling Rock moved to New Jersey. But screw Rolling Rock. Drink Iron City. Or my favorite, Straub. (What can I say? I'm a just a hillbilly.)

But here's some big news: Straub has just released a new flavor: Peter Straub Special Dark. I would say to go buy a case, but you can't. It's only available in kegs. Because their bottling machines are already going at full tilt delivering the old-school Straub. Which I guess means they are doing OK. Which is excellent.

So go to a bar and order one. Or have a kegger at your house.

In the meantime, check out this promotion for the product. Yeah, that's right. They had a concert. Featuring George Thorogood and the Destroyers. Which is about as big as it gets up in my old neck of the woods.

Huzzah, Straub!

Hell With the Lid Taken Off. And a Little Soy Sauce.

People who are fascinated with manufacturing and industry (like me) spend a lot of time thinking about where those jobs are going and what it all means. And a lot of us blame a lot of things on China. Which is probably accurate, to a certain extent. Probably not, to a different extent.

But no matter what you think of it, you ought to check out this article about what's happening to the environment in China. If you have read anything about the history of Pittsburgh, you will probably recognize some of the language.

Public health is reeling. Pollution has made cancer China’s leading cause of death, the Ministry of Health says. Ambient air pollution alone is blamed for hundreds of thousands of deaths each year. Nearly 500 million people lack access to safe drinking water.

Chinese cities often seem wrapped in a toxic gray shroud. Only 1 percent of the country’s 560 million city dwellers breathe air considered safe by the European Union. Beijing is frantically searching for a magic formula, a meteorological deus ex machina, to clear its skies for the 2008 Olympics.

Environmental woes that might be considered catastrophic in some countries can seem commonplace in China: industrial cities where people rarely see the sun; children killed or sickened by lead poisoning or other types of local pollution; a coastline so swamped by algal red tides that large sections of the ocean no longer sustain marine life.

Interesting. For years, I have heard a lot of people claim that tariffs and other punitive trade measures would "level the playing field" with China--or whichever Asian bugaboo was stealing American jobs at the time. Other folks insisted on trade agreements that would force costs to rise in Asia, either by encouraging unions or mandating expensive work and safety rules.

But now it seems that the great "leveling" could come through environmental regulations. Which, of course, the Chinese government would resist. And we would be somewhat powerless to enforce--apart from closing our ports. Hmmm... All of which seems to do the strange trick of putting environmentalists in bed with American manufacturing. Sure, they are already tight with labor. But that's a different thing altogether.

These are not original observations, to be sure. But it will be weird to see how it all pans out. Especially with the whole Olympics thing coming up.

Best Steakhouse EVER Opens in Pittsburgh. Maybe.

So the new Capital Grille is opening up downtown. Will an upscale steakhouse succeed where Renaissance I, Renaissance II, Three Rivers Stadium, PNC Park, Heinz Field, and the convention center failed? That is, will it revitalize downtown? Maybe, if you combine that and all the other projects going on down there.

So, will we finally get a 24-hour downtown for all those hundreds of millions (billions?) of public dollars invested?

"I believe that once that happens with G.C. Murphy's, once that happens with PNC, once that happens with Piatt Place, then all of the sudden that property becomes more valuable and I think you're just going to see, slowly but surely, the gradual growth around those areas happen," [Mayor Luke Ravenstahl] said. "Just like it's taken time to get where we are now, it's going to take time to revitalize all those blighted areas of Downtown."

Herky Pollock, the executive vice president of real estate firm CB Richard Ellis/Pittsburgh who is helping to market the Millcraft projects, said that until now, other property owners in the corridor have not had the benefit of the foot traffic from the Capital Grille and Piatt Place development.

"Once they see the potential of a quality establishment and the rents they're able to garner, these developers most definitely will realize the opportunity before them," he said.

The question of what role restaurants play in revitalizing downtowns is not a trivial one, by the way. Check out Richard's Rules for Restaurant Driven Revitalization. I find this really interesting:

Steven Gartner, president of Metro Commercial Real Estate, the revitalization of urban retail follows four phases. Gartner played a leading role in Center City Philadelphia's expanding retail scene and many of its economically-growing neighborhoods.

1. Local restaurants, started by great chefs. Or visionary entrepreneurs who know great chefs. People will venture out to on-the-edge neighborhoods for acclaimed food, often in tiny venues. They'll take even more risks for top live music.

2. Larger format restaurants that represent more of an investment and draw a larger audience from a larger geographic area. Essentially the same people as above who now have a more established customer base.

3. Locally-owned specialty retail shops, including art galleries. Yes, but only after there's a base population of diners and entertainment seekers that provide the foot traffic.

4. National chains, the risk-averse businesses that hike up rents, this only happens if there is a weak sense of community, otherwise the local residents prefer independents that support their economy and culture.

OK. But doesn't it kind of seem like Pittsburgh is skipping right to number four? Back to the Post-Gazette article:

In November, another chain restaurant, McCormick & Schmick's, will join Capital Grille on the first floor.

Which of course goes back to something discussed here a while back: "Charm." Last year, Herb Burger, Chairman of the Pittsburgh Task Force, wrote an op-ed extolling the work the Piatts were set to do downtown. Part of that op-ed suggested:

We need to sort out more qualities that will add warmth and charm to the new Downtown -- make it attractive physically and economically.

Now, I don't think these things are necessarily exclusive. But neither do they necessarily go hand in hand. Las Vegas isn't warm and charming. But it is economically attractive. Same as, say, Shenzen, China. But that's neither here nor there. What I am getting at is, we do seem to be angling for national chain restaurants downtown. Good thing? Bad thing? Hell if I know. But even if they are the right choice, they certainly don't provide much charm.

As for steakhouses, I like them. I am a meat and potatoes fellow. But to be honest, Outback is fine for my unsophisticated tastes. A former boss took me to Ruth's Chris once. It was good, I guess. But I was underwhelmed. That is, it wasn't any better than most other steaks I've had. Another time, I took my wife to a fancy local place in DC. I think it was called Sam and Harry's. Very posh. It cost us $175. Tasty. But after it was all said and done, we would have rather eaten somewhere cheaper and spent the difference on booze.

Like most things, there seems to be a plateau, and a $13 dollar steak is about all the steak I need. I am not saying that there isn't a difference. Just that I can't tell. So I'd rather save the money.

But that's just me.

Pittsburgh: Sucky for Singles?

Ugh. The Post-Gazette is reporting on yet another list ranking cities. This is one that people watch sort of closely, as it looks at how cities measure up for "singles." You know... the young creative types that will save us all. So how did we do? Not so good: 35th out of 40.

But let me be the first to say it: If you are wringing your hands over this, someone ought to break your fingers. These lists are fun, I guess. But they don't mean a whole lot. Don't believe me? Let's examine the methodolgy employed in this case (as reported in the PG):

Forbes.com arrives at these admittedly subjective placements by measuring the 40 largest U.S. metropolitan areas according to calculations of culture (the number of museums, pro sports teams, live theater and concert venues per capita, as well as the university population)...

OK. Hold on. What's this mean? Are these things necessarily good? I lived in Baltimore in my early 20s, and I went to museums and pro-sports events maybe five times total. Granted, I was more of a boozehound than some of you might have been. But this seems tilted toward a certain "class" of individual. And is "per capita" a good measure? What if all the concert venues suck? I know it is hard to measure "quality," but more concert halls does not, necessarily, a better city make.

...nightlife (number of bars, restaurants and nightclubs per capita)...

OK. That's more like it. But again, quantity does not mean everything. Would you rather live in a place with two really nice local pubs, or one with an Applebees, a TGIFridays and a Don Pablos?

...job growth (projections for the next five years)...

Chris Briem, take it away.

...the cost of living alone (the sum of the average apartment rent, a Pizza Hut pizza, a six-pack of Heineken and a movie ticket)...

Heineken? Movie tickets? Sheesh.

... online dating (number of profiles on Yahoo! Personals)...

Wait. If all these people are doing great on the singles scene, why would they be looking for dates online? Wouldn't a large number of online profiles speak to a BAD dating scene?

...the number of other singles (people never married over 15)...

But the number doesn't mean anything at all. It's the RATIO. And it doesn't work for everybody. For instance, if I were a single man I would love to live in a city with just 99 other single people. As long as they were all women. And I would hate to live in a city with a million other singles, if a large percentage of them were men.

...and "coolness" (derived from a nationwide poll of adults by market research firm Harris Interactive).

I think I am going to cry. Which, in and of itself, would reduce our coolness quotient by quite a lot. Balls. Go to a bar. Drink until your BAC intersects with your IQ. You'll find someone you like. Believe me. Or just by yourself a six pack of Heineken, rent a movie and order a pizza. I hear that's what the people in cool cities do.

A Different Diaspora: Connectivity Wishes and Brain Drain Dreams

Mike Madison has done some admirable work trying to create a different view of "Pittsburgh." One aspect of that is connecting with people who have left the area but still consider themselves "Burgh" types in some fashion or another. The whole Pittsburgh Manifesto is here.

I bring it up because it seems that Madison & Co. might be part of a trend. Or maybe it's a trend-let. Or maybe... I don't know. But check this out:

GlobalErie.com

It is the brainchild of Peter Panepento. He was a columnist at the Erie Times-News for six years, but recenty relocated to Washington, DC, where he's a senior reporter for the Chronicle of Philanthropy. Anyway, as an Erie expat, he keeps running into other Erie expats. And he thinks that there s something to be made of it. Something that might actually be good for Erie.

Is it? We'll see. But in the meantime, you have dig the website's tagline: Putting Erie's Brain Drain to Use.

Heh.

It's still in it's early stages and there is not a lot of content. But he promises some interviews with prominent ex-Erie people and some other interesting stuff. Give it a look.

Redevelopment On (Or Is It Through?) the Silver Screen

Hey. Guess how Cleveland is planning to attract the creative class? Handing out money to movie makers, that's how. From an editorial in the Plain Dealer:

With the entrepreneurial Carmody ready to move on, the commission has hired a Hollywood insider: Ivan Schwarz spent 20 years in the business as a location manager and producer. He'll tap his many contacts to promote Cleveland, the city he adopted as his home after first scouting it as a movie site.

The legislature and Gov. Ted Strickland can help Schwarz - and other Ohio movie promoters - by offering the kind of tax incentives other states give productions. The governor dislikes tax credits, but in this case, they'd be a wise investment in a clean industry that would help bolster Ohio's appeal to creative professionals who can do their work anywhere.

Of course, it is hard to see how Cleveland will compete with similar efforts in Pittsburgh:

The Pittsburgh Film Office board released a 23-page study touting its mission and accomplishments yesterday, in advance of a face-off with critics seeking to reorganize the 16-year-old agency. The report mainly drives home the agency's place as an economic development generator -- that it has leveraged $75 in regional spending from every dollar in government funding it has received since 1990 (or $268 million from its $3.5 million in total support).

A local group of film industry professionals called the Pittsburgh Film and Media Alliance has lately been criticizing the film agency, saying it has not been successful at wooing large productions to the region and should refocus on working with local filmmakers. They have also criticized the film office board for allowing the agency's director, Dawn Keezer, to move to Los Angeles.

The problem? Oh, come on. Of course you know the problem. Not enough money. But never fear:

More than two months after Gov. Rendell met with legislators and high-profile Hollywood representatives to talk about making the state more competitive for movie and TV projects, the Senate approved measures doing just that and the House followed late yesterday afternoon.

An earlier vote led to a slight increase in funding for state libraries, while other funding decisions that affect arts groups such as the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra were still pending.

On the film front, the bills provide for a $75 million tax credit program to lure large productions to the state and $5 million in grants to attract smaller ones. An early pitch had been made for no cap on the credits, but $75 million is still a vast improvement over the existing $10 million a year that had been available.

"It's seven and a half times better than in the past three years. We're thrilled," said Dawn Keezer, director of the Pittsburgh Film Office. "We're much more competitive. Other states have been spending a lot of money to incentivize this industry."

Sigh.

Big Project Versus Little Project: I Thought This Wasn't Possible

Now I'm really confused.

Today's Post-Gazette has a really interesting story about architects working on tiny little projects--impossible projects, really--refurbing little slivers of the city. Like taking a decrepit old building sandwiched between two other decrepit buildings and turning it into high-end office space and apartments. It's incredibly complex. And expensive. But it turns out... it can be done.

But wait. I thought that was impossible. You remember. The city has told us for years that the only way to revitalize a neighborhood is for the government to buy up all the properties--taking them through eminent domain, if necessary--then give the properties to a single, politically-connected developer. Or sell them to that developer at a loss. And then to pile on the subsidies.

They always claim this is the best way to do things. No matter what the project. High-end condos? Mid-range condos? Public housing? Department stores? Stadiums? Doesn't matter. The formula holds.

Look. I am not saying that the "other" way discussed in this article represents some paragon of libertarian virtue. Or that it represents a counter-argument that should apply in all cases. And I can see why this might not work well in a lot of cases. Still. This does seem to offer a different way of looking at things.

Pretty neat, I'd say.

Pittsburgh and Population

Chris Briem has been busy of late. First an informative op-ed in the Post-Gazette, then a related blog post. Check them out in all their wonky goodness.

Both deal with migration and population, constant points of discussion/contention in Pittsburgh. Briem does a nice job of coming across as less pessimistic than many of the people who have made a cottage industry of wringing their hands about the local head count. Sure, a lot of people are leaving. But a lot of people are arriving, too. Rather than having me paraphrase the whole thing, just read it.

In the meantime, I think the op-ed does a good job of touching on another important truth: The numbers presented in the article are largely regional ones. But they are hardly the only ones that matter:

Within the region, the movement of population is reshaping the region. The continuing movement of population away from urban cores is true for regions across the country. Suburbanization and exurbanization is a trend almost everywhere. Allegheny County has long been the concentration of population and employment in Southwestern Pennsylvania. That it bears the brunt of population loss as residents move ever farther out is almost unavoidable.

Yet even though more people leave Allegheny County each year than arrive, there are still thousands who move into the county from the suburbs each year. It is not a one-way flow.

The movement of population within the region has its consequences as well. New infrastructure is needed even as regional population is stagnant. Jobs are not moving out from the core at the same rate as residents showing that workers are willing to endure ever-longer commutes. Today, thousands travel into the region daily from Ohio, West Virginia and beyond.

I think this touches a few very raw nerves. Because a lot of people wouldn't be at all happy if the Pittsburgh region grew by leaps and bounds... but all the new people were in Cranberry. We see this with the current discussion about housing "downtown." My mind goes back to this article in the early days of the mayor's abatement proposal:

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl would love to be the guy who reverses the city's six-decade population plunge. His formula for doing that includes affordable living and merrymaking Downtown, more fun development like the SouthSide Works, and engagement between the city and its school district.

I think that when a lot of people talk about the "population plunge," they are in fact talking about the city. And assigning that reality to the entire region. As Briem has shown time and again, you have to be careful about what you are talking about. And even more careful not to cherry pick the numbers that suit your argument on any given day. It's easy to let it get away from you.

At any rate, I do think that the intramural scuffle is at least as interesting as the regional one. I know I have pointed this out a thousand times, but I do think it is important to think about where the new city residents will come from in the mayor's abatement proposal and other "downtown" initiatives. Because for a lot of people, getting a few thousand people to move from Cranberry to the Golden Triangle would be a great achievement. Others might see it as pointless. Others. like me, wonder what will happen if a whole bunch of the new downtown types come from other city neighborhoods. Which puts me in mind of another discussion of Ravenstahl's abatement plan:

The measure, approved 8-0, will waive the first $2,700 in city property taxes for 10 years on new housing units built Downtown and in 28 other city neighborhoods.

"It's symbolic of our effort to prioritize and give incentives for people to move back Downtown and to create incentives for people to move back into neighborhoods that haven't seen investment for some time," Mayor Luke Ravenstahl said.

Move downtown and into the neighborhoods... from Cleveland? From Westmoreland County? From Shadyside? What's interesting is that these things could have a hugely transformative impact on the city and on the region as a whole. But they could, conceivably, have very little impact on the region's total headcount. Or they might have a large impact.

Either way, I bet there will be a way to look at the numbers that will allow the optimists to remain optimistic, and for the pessimists to remain pessimistic. Of course, that's a pretty safe wager.

Convention Center Business: Hilarious. And Sad.

What is it they say about seeing sausage made? Well, that has nothing on watching people sell convention centers to convention holders. Check out this article in the Baltimore Sun. See, the problem there is that the city spent a kajillion dollars on a "world class" convention center. Because everyone wanted to be "major league." Or something. Unfortunately, it didn't work. Convention center officials say it would have worked if only there was a better hotel. Which everyone said private developers would build. Everyone was wrong, of course, so now the city is footing the bill for the $300 million hotel.

So what to do now? How to generate more convention business? Guess.

The city has its work cut out for it. Numbers released in February revealed a major decline in hotel room nights booked for Convention Center conferences in the next few years.

And with so much on the line, the Baltimore Area Convention and Visitors Association, of which Noonan is chairman and chief executive officer, has apparently decided that nothing attracts money like money - or at least the perfumed, wined and risotto'd perception of it.

Yeah. The city has a huge bus staffed with a fancy chef. Trying to prove to everyone that Baltimore is world-class and major league. Never mind the fact that the convention center was supposed to do that. That would be nay-saying. So just make some risotto and give it away.

Oh. And this:

Guests each get a pair of Crocs, those rubbery clogs with holes. Crocs go on feet, and in Baltimore, one must remember, "You're two feet away from everything."

I wish I was in charge of marketing. I would send in a guy with a pistol to rob every person in the room. The message being: "This is what we did to taxpayers to build this ridiculous boondoggle." And then I would give them some risotto.

Question: How long until Pittsburgh gets a bus? And when we do get one, will this guy like it?

Jeremy Figoten, who's shopping for a site for the National Apartment Association's 2012 annual meeting, says he really couldn't care less about the spread Baltimore laid before him, or even that the mayor took the time to shake his hand.

"It doesn't really do anything for me," he says.

Figoten wants convention space that will comfortably hold his group, he wants a location that people can easily fly or drive to, he wants nightlife and things to do.

"So far Baltimore has filled all those needs," he says, but then quickly adds - so have many other cities. He hasn't even whittled his list beyond a dozen - everywhere from Las Vegas to Orlando, Fla., to New Orleans.

"Any city can hold a nice lunch," he says. "We're casting a wide net."