AntiRust

The Move: Slow Posting

Wow. The site has been on a real role. Like 300 hits a day for a while. Which is big. For me at least. And only 85 percent of that was me.

But it's been slow for a few days. Because I am moving and don't have internet access until Tuesday at the earliest.

So don't forget about us.

And keep posting comments.

OK. I have a couch to wrestle into submission...

Downtown Living: What's Good for the Flatlander Is Good for the Ridgerunner

Ed Rendell was in town the other day. And here's what he had to say to a reporter:

“If a downtown is to come back, we need people to live downtown.”

Only he wasn't in Pittsburgh. And he wasn't in Philly. Erie? Scranton? Harrisburg? Nope.

The governor was in Elk County. St. Mary's, to be exact. The home of Straub beer.

And he came with a check.  A big one. So what does St. Mary's get?

During a ceremony held in the Depot Street parking lot, the future site of downtown development, Rendell said the funds will help complete an essential component of the multifaceted project.

The $4 million has been earmarked to help the city construct a three-level, 625-space parking garage on the site of the Industrial Steel building, which will later be relocated.

... The intermodal center will occupy half of the first level of the garage, which will have a higher ceiling to provide access for buses to enter the facility. There will be five buses owned and operated by the Elk County Transit Authority located at the facility.

But that's not all:

The project will help transform the downtown with the inclusion of Marien Stadt Place, a 24-unit senior living apartment complex which will offer affordable housing to those 62 years of age and older. The center has received approximately $2.8 million in funding.

So it turns out transit and downtown residential are not only the perfect answers for disparate cities like Baltimore and Pittsburgh. It works for St. Mary's, too.

I hope so. But there are certainly some challenges. First of all, I am not all that sure that anyone ever lived downtown there. Moreover, St. Mary's is small enough that if you don't live downtown, you are probably in pretty easy walking distance. There are some places further afield, but generally speaking, people living in these towns can walk to church. If they want to. (Most don't want to.)

If you think it's hard to get suburbanites onto transit, try people who live in the woods. I mean, the population density is pretty low. And it would be hard to imagine a whole lot of people heading to any one given destination at any given time. Or a convenient central pick-up spot for all of them even if they did all want to take the bus. Unless of course they all drive to the parking garage. Which sort of defeats the purpose, no?

In the past, "transit" has meant buses for old people. Given the construction of the new living facility for old people, perhaps that's still the case.

And about those old people: The new housing rings in at just about $100,000 per unit. That makes it some of the most expensive housing in the region, I would think. You can raise seven or eight kids in a house that costs $60,000 in Ridgway. St. Mary's is pricier, but still. One hundred grand is a lot.

Oh well, at least this will go a little ways towards dispelling the long-held rural belief that cities get all the tax money. (I stress "a little ways." And don't bash me. I'm just reporting on long-held beliefs.)

Oh, and the 625-spot parking garage: Approximately 14,000 people live in St. Mary's. Do a little math... Carry the one...

So on a per capita basis, this is roughly equivalent to a 13,000-spot garage in Pittsburgh.

Gentrification, Control and the Fate of Pigtown: What's In a Name?

Great story here about Baltimore's Pigtown, until recently a very rough-and-tumble kind of place. The city tried to "revitalize" it in the 70s, but of course failed.

One of the more interesting hold-overs from that effort was an attempt to rename the neighborhood "Washington Village." Seems that the urban planners, in all their wisdom, thought Pigtown was a bit, er, rough and tumble.

But the whole "Village" thing was a load of BS and the new name didn't stick. Or did it?

Residents are currently trying to get some sort of historical designation. And there is a fight over what the area is really called. The debate pits new residents versus old, in many cases. (The area has recently become a pretty hot district, apparently overtaking Hampden as the "up and coming" neighborhood.)

This is a perfect stand-in for the constant battle facing gentrifying neighborhoods. And I think it helps to consider it in terms of an emotional debate happening somewhere else. Offers a bit of perspective.

In case you're wondering, I prefer Pigtown.

New Urbanism in Pennsylvania

Or make that The New Urbanism in Pennsylvania.

Since the last post on New Urbanism generated some interest, I thought I might point out something I just discovered: there is an organization dedicated to such things right here in PA.

It's called The Association for the New Urbanism in Pennsylvania. The extra "the" makes me kind if suspicious. Kind of like with THE Ohio State University. But still, it makes for interesting reading. Particularly the history. Seems that most of the interst is coming from the the eastern and central parts of the state. Hmm.

But perhaps even more interesting is this: A list of "traditional neighborhood development projects" underway across the state.

Summerset at Frick is one of them. (There are others hereabouts as well.)

I guess that answers my question. (I had asked if Summerset at Frick counted as New Urbanism.) But still. That development is certainly new. But is it urban? Is anything walkable? I haven't been there for a while. Have they put in some stores? Can you get a loaf of bread without getting into your car? And can you stumble home drunk from a bar? Doesn't matter if the bread is Stroemann and the bar is a TGIFridays. As long as you can do it without a car. That's pretty much how I define "walkable."

Here's ANUPA's definition of New Urbanism. Does Summerset at Frick meet many of these? Like I said, I haven't been there for a while. But from what I saw, apart from the architecture it wasn't all that different from other developments I have been in. Does New Urbanism ultimately come down to a question of physical aesthetics? Hell if I know.

But here's what I do know: I am for The New Urbanism if it allows you to stumble home from a bar. Against it if not. Period. If I were an urban planner, I would design a paradise and call it Stumbletown. Or, if forced to give a fancier name like all the newer developments: The Stumbles at Stumbling Acres.

Anyway, check it out.

More Development Stuff: Baltimore vs. Pittsburgh

Here's more from the Baltimore Sun's series on urban development.

Here's my take so far: Baltimore is an industrial city struggling to make its way in a post-industrial age. It is also a city that faces a problem--its economy appears poised to add 200,000 jobs in the next 25 years and there are no houses in which to put all the people.

Pittsburgh, on the other hand, is an industrial city struggling to make its way in a post-industrial age. It is also a city that faces a problem--its economy does NOT appear poised to add 200,000 jobs in the next 25 years. So there are no people to fill the empty houses.

Oddly enough, both cities seem to be responding with the same set of solutions: A stadium here, a convention center there...

And gobs and gobs of new housing, particularly downtown.

I might not agree with what's going on in Baltimore. But it seems to make a bit more sense given the nature of their problem.

That is, Baltimore spent decades doing the whole Big Bang thing. You know, the Inner Harbor (quick, someone cue up Handel's Messiah) and other huge projects designed to draw tourists and tourist money which would translate into revitalization. Which didn't work, as people kept packing up and leaving.

So now they are all coming back for... what,that fudge place at the Inner Harbor? No. They are coming back for JOBS.

Jobs that are as far away as Washington, DC.

Jobs jobs jobs jobs jobs. (Although I am certain that in 2025 we will hear all about how the Inner Harbor saved the city.)

Unfortunately for Pittsburgh, I think, we don't have a sprawling, wealthy, federally-funded job machine a few miles to the south. And we don't have that machine's people scrounging around for housing. And we don't have a countryside already packed to the gills with development. Might seem that way. But it's not even close to DC.

So doesn't it seem strange that our plan is the same as theirs? Doesn't the Baltimore experience kind of show that the jobs are the thing? That without them, you can build as many lemonade stands as you want, but people won't come?

Go Myron! The Post-Gazette is Looking More and More Foolish on Smoking. And Less and Less Honest.

Not so long ago, the Post-Gazette was in an opportunistic mood. The U.S. Surgeon General had come out with a report warning about the dangers of second-hand smoke. Rather than asking people to debate the topic, the paper tried to squash discussion by charging that legislators who disagreed with an immediate ban on smoking in public places must be "kissing the feet of these businessmen and tobacco lobbyists." All those huge brains and all those fancy degrees at the editorial meeting, and they could only conjure up one possible reason people might be opposed to the ban: Corruption. Weird, huh?

But then it got even more weird. Because it turns out a lot of people don't think the Surgeon General's report actually says what the Post-Gazette says it says. That is, there appears to be a lot of debate about the main claim: That even small doses of second-hand smoke put people at risk.

Who is doubting this? Try public health doctors who ACTUALLY SUPPORT smoking bans but refuse to use dubious scare tactics to reach their goals.

Or try doctors right here in Pittsburgh.

But the Post-Gazette's position was not in real trouble until today. Because today the great Myron Cope beat the hell out of the Post-Gazette. In the Post-Gazette.

It is beautiful. Please read it.

So let's get this straight. According to the Post-Gazette, people who oppose a ban based on this report are "kissing the feet" of Big Tobacco. They are somehow influenced--prevented from doing what is OBVIOUSLY right--by all that money and power. Well, if that's the case, one of America's top tobacco opponents is kissing the feet of Big Tobacco. So is a local doctor.

And so is Myron Frickin' Cope.

I look forward to a bit of reporting from the Post-Gazette, hard-hitting stuff that reveals just how much Mr. Cope received from the lobbyists.

Or is it possible to actually oppose the ban on other grounds?

If so, the Post-Gazette owes several hundred legislators an apology. It owes its readers an apology. And for heaven's sake, it owes everyone a full, open report on what the report actually says.

And then perhaps they can hire an ombudsman--or someone like an ombudsman--to take a look into why the editorial board is using reports it hasn't read to sully other people's reputations.

Don't hold your breath.

I suppose one night be tempted to congratulate the PG for publishing opposing views. But that isn't enough after you go around accusing people of being beholden to Big Money. It just isn't. And if the editors could at least be honest with themselves they would realize that.

More on Smart Growth: Replace (Decrepit) Retail with (Suburban) Residential?

More from the Baltimore Sun's series on Smart Growth and overcrowding.

More excellent reporting. A bit of it:

Travel to a run-down stretch of Ritchie Highway for one answer to the Baltimore region's looming housing shortage. The long-boarded-up shops of Southview Shopping Center in Anne Arundel County are set to give way to homes starting at more than $300,000.

Land alongside the highly commercialized route might seem an odd place for builders to zero in on for new houses. But downtown Baltimore is five miles north, the airport's five miles southwest and Interstate 695 is just a jog away.

Sound like a good solution? Or is this sprawl, only closer? How will these people get to work? Where will they work? Are they supposed to drive to some sort of connecting bus route? What if they won't? These things aren't a problem if there are just a few hundred or even a few thousand new people in the mix. But we are talking 200,000 workers. And their families.

Interesting.

Let's say 200,000 families were moving to Pittsburgh. Would it make things better or worse if we tore down some of the retail on the way to Monroevile and put some of the people there? Would the answer change if the only other option were to put them on the OTHER SIDE of Monroeville?

No, the parallels aren't exact. Or even close. But it might be worth trying to think about it in a Pittsburgh context.

That is, how might we get such people to move into one of the hundreds of empty houses in places like Swissvale? Should we? That's not an option in Baltimore, because its houses are full of people. So aren't we better positioned? Now all we have to do is come up with 200,000 jobs.

Would this be a better place if we did?

Last: Why do the homes have to start at $300,000? Geez.

Yinzer Pride or Yinzer Patronizing?

A bumper sticker.

Discuss.

Possible discussion topics: Who is "allowed" to affix this sticker to his car? Who is not?

Thank you.

I'm running for cover.

Walkability, the Village at Pine and the Promise (Threat?) of New Urbanism

Jonathan Potts was nice enough to mention our little discussion about development. And provided another link worth pursuing. Here is Mr. Potts discussing how

a sprawling suburban community begins to wake up to the benefits of walkable communities. Suburban apologist Joel Kotkin--who also happens to be one of the most astute critics of modren urban redevelopment policies--wrote about this last year, and here were my thoughts then.

That first link takes you to a Post-Gazette story about the Village at Pine, an experiment in building a "walkable community."

These are always interesting. Some people claim that early iterations of this kind of New Urbanism, like Kentlands, Maryland, have been profound success stories.

Some libertarian types are skeptical.

So are some non-libertarian types.

These links are extremely interesting, so for once I'll shut up.

But really. Read them. Especially the "libertarian" take on Portland, Oregon. People often use the city as a model for how things should be. This is a pretty vicious dissent. I met the guy who wrote it. And he means serious business.

What all this means for the Village at Pine, I don't know.

Slow Growth versus Fast Growth: Considering the Costs

Allowing completely unrestrained growth in suburban areas certainly has costs. But so does restricting growth. Today's Baltimore Sun (I know... a lot from that paper recently, but it has had a lot of good stuff) kicks off a series about the downside of such policies. The problem? The Baltimore area will likely see explosive growth over the next generation. But Slow Growth policies mean that there might not be anywhere for these new people to live. A taste:

The Baltimore metropolitan area stands ready to add more than 200,000 jobs over the next 25 years, propelled by the huge economic engine of the nation's capital and the growing demands of talent-hungry employers. But it won't have enough homes for all those workers. ...

Experts say the disparity will over time further pressure housing costs in an area that has seen steep price increases in the past few years, outpacing many other regions. The shortage would probably push workers into ever-longer commutes, clogging highways and local roads. Ultimately, some say, the housing crunch could choke job growth and throw the region into a recession.

"There is a price to be paid for constrained supply," said Nicolas P. Retsinas, director of Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies.

Local leaders aren't sounding alarms. Just the opposite. They adamantly promote job growth and just as adamantly keep a lid on residential development, ignoring any conflict between the two policies. ...

"Nobody wants to stop the job growth ... but everybody wants to stop the housing growth," said Jeff Bronow, chief of research for Howard County's planning department.

Higher housing prices and longer commutes? Sheesh. Baltimore was a much cheaper and navigable city when I arrived there in 1996. I probably could have afforded a house in the Canton/Fell's Point area. Too bad I spent all my money in bars, because such a house would be worth a heck of a lot right now. So once again: Where are the toilet scrubbers going to live?

And a few other questions. Has anyone done the research to figure out the average land area "footprint" of an average American? Take Pittsburgh, for instance. Let's say the population of the city returned to its historic high. That many people would NEVER fit inside the city limits anymore. At least I don't think so. Seems like people want a lot more space. Baltimore is in a similar situation. All those people used to fit.

So is the answer to return to the days when eight kids lived barracks-style in the same bedroom? That would be tough, since families don't have eight kids anymore. Or should we go back to "rooms" instead of apartments, with strangers sharing a bathroom at the end of the hall? A lot of European cities still operate that way. Will laundromats make a comeback?

Or would people rather commute two hours each way? If so, is that a better land use?

The final question: Are these really unfortunate conundrums--or the actual GOAL of Slow Growth? You know, er, to slow growth? Isn't that what it's supposed to do? Proponents will charge that this is a false choice. That you can restrict housing growth AND have economic growth. But something has to give. Either people have to change their lifestyles or the price of housing has to explode. Right?

I guess one solution is to build "up." Which seems to be happening with the growth of downtown residential. But downtown Baltimore can't hold 200,000 workers and their families. So should more places look like downtown? Which places? Moreover, while building up works fine for singles and creative people and rich folks who can afford space, I am not aware of any plans to attract young families into the now downtown condo developments. Or am I wrong on that count?

I just don't see soccer moms giving up their yards and school districts for a 10th floor two-bedroom.

Is that what has to happen? If so, I predict resistance.

Read the article, though. It's an interesting discussion.