Wow. The Washington Post is full of support for suburban living today. Check out the annual dining guide, which offers this little ditty:
And certain suburbs, Alexandria in particular, now boast so many exceptional restaurants that there's no need to venture into the District for a great meal. Even our street corners have begun offering better than just hot dogs.
Remember when one of the main arguments for city-living was "culture"? You had to go downtown for great restaurants and theater and all the rest. That appears to be changing, at least in some places.
Here? I don't know. I am not a foodie by any stretch. I am more of an ambience sort of guy. And by that, I do not mean white tablecloths. I like places like the Bonfire out by Leechburg, and a lot of the little family-run places here in Bloomfield. I am especially fond of bizarre backwoods establishments like the Halton Hilton, Cougar Bob's and the Blue Jay. None of which would make the Washington Post's "best of" list.
But I wonder what this means for people who do prefer "good restaurants." Locally, is it necessary to travel into the city? I understand places like Mt. Lebo have some good spots that rival anything in the city. But what about overall? Is the city still the place for what most observers would consider the "best restaurants"?
Definitely the city. I know of only a handful of what I would consider "good" restaurants in the south hills. Ditto for the north hills. I can't think of many places I would go out of my way to drive to in either the western or eastern suburbs.
Posted by: Schultz | October 14, 2007 at 07:38 AM
First of all, I think even you admited that previously that Alexandria is a bit more of a town/small city than a real suburb.
Second, once again you like to pick screwed up cities for your comparisons since in the case of real ones-- like NY-- this is not true. DC, is in many ways very much like Pittsburgh, in that I don't think it has a whole lot of nice mixed use dense neighborhoods, which means that residents in the city don't get a whole lot of urban type conveniences either.
Both DC, and Pittsburgh act as non profit job providers their suburban areas, and both are always on the brink of bankruptcy, because of it.
Posted by: John Morris | October 14, 2007 at 11:51 AM
Given, that so much of the wealth in the DC region is in the suburbs-- isn't the real question, why there why there are so few good restaurants in it's suburbs?
Why doesn't Tyson's corner show up as a hot spot for food? Why not Cranberry? By, the way, MT. Lebo, is far from being a classic suburb either, it's a bit more of a town with a transit line and and quite a lot of apartment buildings.
Posted by: John Morris | October 14, 2007 at 12:05 PM
"Both DC, and Pittsburgh act as non profit job providers their suburban areas, and both are always on the brink of bankruptcy, because of it."
Non-profit? Are you joking? Considering the tax burden the suburbanites bear in order to keep building condos, office buildings, summerset-esque mcmansions developments, stadia, convention centers hotels, under-river light rail tunnels to nowhere etc etc I doubt you could make the case there's no profit in process that induces jobs into the city locations that wouldn't otherwise choose that location.
If there were to be a study done on the percentage state and county tax-subsidized development that is aimed at the city of Pittsburgh where 325,000 live and what percentage that goes to the rest of the county where 965,000 live I'm pretty sure we'd see that it's not the city getting the short end of the stick.
The truth is that it's the city that's getting the jobs program subsidies... and they still can't keep it together.
Posted by: Paul | October 15, 2007 at 03:57 AM
Hi Paul,
I agree that there area lot of subsidised developments in the city. What I am refering to is the job base vs. the tax base. Pittsburgh has something like 140,000 commuters into the city everyday who rely on the city for their job.( I think there are something like 40,000, who commute the other way so it's 100,000 net) Many of them work for the Government, or a mega "non profit", that is paying little or nothing in taxes and then they are taking the cash out of town.
Not included in any of thees subsidy numbers is the communist road system, that is the base of all low density development. Many of these roads out of the city do little or no good to city residents.
The city has also had to bear the direct social cost of lots of regional amenities. The stadiums for example cause major traffic problems, waste critical urban land and create parking dead zones in the city while providing a benefit for non residents.
Posted by: John Morris | October 16, 2007 at 12:04 PM
I'm just impressed w/ the list from the ANF! I have never seen you at the Blue Jay man and I go there everytime I go backpacking in the Forest. Cougar
Bob's rules and the Halton Hilton Belly Buster is supreme dining! Cheers!
Posted by: Eric | October 30, 2007 at 07:23 AM
WOW, what a beautiful Theme and Fresh It is. Thanks guys.
Posted by: woz hypotheek | March 02, 2009 at 06:38 PM
I have an allergy to quinine. It was discovered by accident when I
was a toddler. I was given tonic water and reacted with a rash. My
skin has always been sensitive and reactive to certain foods. It
wasn't until recently that I read about quinine-like substances in
certain fruits, such as grapefruit. My question is, what other foods
have compounds with a similar chemical structure to quinine? Thanks
kindly for your help.
Posted by: viagra online | April 27, 2010 at 08:50 AM
The gap between NSQ and Stacy was less than six seconds. Way too close for comfort, but she'll take it. Ironically, after some horrific displays in the past, the margin of victory today may have come from NSQ's relatively speedy transitions. We have now burned her sock collection.
Posted by: Buy Online Rx | October 12, 2010 at 09:06 AM
Always was interested in this theme! If there were to be a study done on the percentage state and county tax-subsidized development that is aimed at the city of Pittsburgh where 325,000 live and what percentage that goes to the rest of the county where 965,000 live I'm pretty sure we'd see that it's not the city getting the short end of the stick.
Posted by: Fashion clothing store | May 30, 2011 at 01:32 AM
I like this..First of all, I think even you admited that previously that Alexandria is a bit more of a town/small city than a real suburb.Good Luck
Posted by: isis iowa | September 01, 2011 at 07:42 AM
This theme has interested me! Considering the tax burden the suburbanites bear in order to keep building condos, office buildings, summerset-esque mcmansions developments, stadia, convention centers hotels, under-river light rail tunnels to nowhere etc etc I doubt you could make the case there's no profit in process that induces jobs into the city locations that wouldn't otherwise choose that location.
Posted by: Camarad | September 06, 2011 at 02:43 AM
What an excellent blog! Second, once again you like to pick screwed up cities for your comparisons since in the case of real ones-- like NY-- this is not true. DC, is in many ways very much like Pittsburgh, in that I don't think it has a whole lot of nice mixed use dense neighborhoods, which means that residents in the city don't get a whole lot of urban type conveniences either.
Posted by: Andrew Garfield | October 07, 2011 at 08:04 AM