Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You just sound incredibly out of touch to me. No use arguing.
Completely. I'm sure even Pittsburgh's worst schools do not have a 50% dropout rate. Sure Carrick is in decline, but I doubt its even a 25% dropout rate.
Interested_Burger, if you are going to quote wild and outrageous facts, have a source to back them up.
Well -- I really like the teal and pink combo, but the yellow is way too harsh next to the blues, I would have got with a butter yellow. Lime is SO two years ago.... and I don't care that Tangerine is the new hot color for 2012 -- I don't like it at all...
Seriously? You're working really hard on this, and that's pretty cool. Thanks.
There has been a 60+ year natural experiment in the United States regarding what does or does not work to build thriving urban neighborhoods. To sum up, very seldom will you do wrong with less parking and more employers, residences, and amenities. Practically, putting that notion into effect can mean just letting developers decide what they want to build without parking minimums and such.
By the way, cheaper housing means you can save more in other ways. And recent experience suggests concentrating your savings in your home is not necessarily a great idea.
Pretty passionate defense of The Waterfront! I don't have any financial ties to any of the corporations involved here so in that sense I don't really care, but from a public policy and community interest perspective, I think it represents a big failure in the sense that government incentivized development in one area (a very distressed area) at the expense of existing development in nearby area (one that had remained fairly stale despite facing many of the same pressures).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evergrey
The revenue Homestead collects from The Waterfront has allowed the borough to be one of the very few "financially distressed" municipalities to climb out of Act 47 purgatory.
That's good for the government of Homestead, although they don't deserve it any more than Duquesne, Rankin, Braddock, or any other failed mon-valley town. There has been very minimal organic growth throughout the borough or revitalization of residential areas since The Waterfront was built. TIF tax credits are to thank for poaching retail from one area (in this case West Mifflin, which had been doing a fair job of resisting the total decline experienced by the adjacent municipalities of Duquesne, McKeesport, Braddock, Rank, etc.) and transferring it to another, a long tradition in the sprawling Pittsburgh metro area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evergrey
I shed no tears for Century III (blame can also be directed at the incompetent management of Simon Properties). The mall replaced the downtown business districts decades ago. The Waterfront represents the phase of post-mall big box retail that has killed the malls.
You're confusing actual consumer shifts with tax breaks given by governments to try and bring additional retail to their communities to generate increased long-term property tax revenue. It was built for easy access from Squirrel Hill and Shadyside. Keep deluding yourself if you think that strip malls are some new organic phase consumer preference (except, of course, the preference to go somewhere new and different) and not just the consequences of municipal governments giving handouts to commericial developers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evergrey
This type of big box agglomeration would have located somewhere...
Possibly true, although 'it would have happened anyway' rarely convinces me of the integrity of a decision. ...Of course, in another decade maybe we'll see Hazelwood "benefit" from corporate welfare and the abandonment of The Waterfront when all the established retailers scramble to cash in on enticements offered by Pittsburgh for development there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evergrey
but The Waterfront is special because... despite its rather lame 90s design...
Right, it's inaccessible to the community in which it's located and is a suburban lifestyle concept set up in an urban area for pseudo-urbanites across the river who wanted easy access to new development. It also has bad traffic jams.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evergrey
it represented one of the first major riverfront brownfield redevelopments in the region... and represented a major investment in a collection of distressed communities (one that required a bold experiment in multi-municipal planning to overcome the usual Pittsburgh municipal hyper-fragmentation).
It is technically on the river front, but aside from the name one would never know. Reminds of "Conestoga Wagon Pine Tree Trails" or some similar name on a new subdivision built on the site of a former forest or farm field.
Multi-municipal planning in the sense of which one of three little municipalities will get the tax revenue. There were no legitimate problems solved here that are the usual goal when talking about benefits of consolidation of government and services.
As stated, the municipal governments get more taxes, that's about it. Steel Valley School District had until that point only Munhall as a viable town (W. Homestead too, but not as consequential because of the lower population) that made substantial contributions, so for them it's a good thing. Homestead is still a welfare and SSI ward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evergrey
It's unfortunate the design of The Waterfront has zero cohesion with the existing urban fabric of Greater Homestead... but at least it's filling the coffers of Homestead, W. Homestead and Munhall... and giving people a reason to travel to what would have been a forgotten corner of the metro.
And on a personal note... The Waterfront is convenient to much of the City Proper while Century III is located in my least favorite sector of Allegheny County... "Area 51". That whole region is a declining twilight zone... Century III probably would've become a Scooby Doo ghost town regardless of The Waterfront or South Hills Village.
People in West Mifflin, Jefferson Hills and Pleasant Hills, Baldwin, Whitehall, Brentwood, etc. are glad to know that life is now a little more convenient for a few people in the East End. I could have just skipped to the last paragraph.
Pretty passionate defense of The Waterfront! I don't have any financial ties to any of the corporations involved here so in that sense I don't really care, but from a public policy and community interest perspective, I think it represents a big failure in the sense that government incentivized development in one area (a very distressed area) at the expense of existing development in nearby area (one that had remained fairly stale despite facing many of the same pressures).
That's good for the government of Homestead, although they don't deserve it any more than Duquesne, Rankin, Braddock, or any other failed mon-valley town. There has been very minimal organic growth throughout the borough or revitalization of residential areas since The Waterfront was built. TIF tax credits are to thank for poaching retail from one area (in this case West Mifflin, which had been doing a fair job of resisting the total decline experienced by the adjacent municipalities of Duquesne, McKeesport, Braddock, Rank, etc.) and transferring it to another, a long tradition in the sprawling Pittsburgh metro area.
You're confusing actual consumer shifts with tax breaks given by governments to try and bring additional retail to their communities to generate increased long-term property tax revenue. It was built for easy access from Squirrel Hill and Shadyside. Keep deluding yourself if you think that strip malls are some new organic phase consumer preference (except, of course, the preference to go somewhere new and different) and not just the consequences of municipal governments giving handouts to commericial developers.
Possibly true, although 'it would have happened anyway' rarely convinces me of the integrity of a decision. ...Of course, in another decade maybe we'll see Hazelwood "benefit" from corporate welfare and the abandonment of The Waterfront when all the established retailers scramble to cash in on enticements offered by Pittsburgh for development there.
Right, it's inaccessible to the community in which it's located and is a suburban lifestyle concept set up in an urban area for pseudo-urbanites across the river who wanted easy access to new development. It also has bad traffic jams.
It is technically on the river front, but aside from the name one would never know. Reminds of "Conestoga Wagon Pine Tree Trails" or some similar name on a new subdivision built on the site of a former forest or farm field.
Multi-municipal planning in the sense of which one of three little municipalities will get the tax revenue. There were no legitimate problems solved here that are the usual goal when talking about benefits of consolidation of government and services.
As stated, the municipal governments get more taxes, that's about it. Steel Valley School District had until that point only Munhall as a viable town (W. Homestead too, but not as consequential because of the lower population) that made substantial contributions, so for them it's a good thing. Homestead is still a welfare and SSI ward.
[/b]
People in West Mifflin, Jefferson Hills and Pleasant Hills, Baldwin, Whitehall, Brentwood, etc. are glad to know that life is now a little more convenient for a few people in the East End. I could have just skipped to the last paragraph.
Thank you for the beatdown. This effete East Ender can muster no response.
Completely. I'm sure even Pittsburgh's worst schools do not have a 50% dropout rate. Sure Carrick is in decline, but I doubt its even a 25% dropout rate.
Interested_Burger, if you are going to quote wild and outrageous facts, have a source to back them up.
Sorry, I should have said a 50% graduation rate. Obviously, that's not impressive by even your standards. Contrast it to neighboring districts like Brentwood and Baldwin, both of whom are solidly above 90%.
Last edited by interested_burgher; 05-06-2012 at 08:21 PM..
Sorry, I should have said a 50% graduation rate. Obviously, that's not impressive by even your standards. Contrast it to neighboring districts like Brentwood and Baldwin, both of whom are solidly above 90%.
Carrick High is around 40% black. Baldwin-Whitehall is around 5% black. Brentwood High is around 1% black.
As I've said in the past, this isn't to say black students are genetically doomed to drop out of high school. But I'm not sure why PPS should be blamed for an issue caused in large part by having a different student body than the adjacent schools.
Carrick High is around 40% black. Baldwin-Whitehall is around 5% black. Brentwood High is around 1% black.
As I've said in the past, this isn't to say black students are genetically doomed to drop out of high school. But I'm not sure why PPS should be blamed for an issue caused in large part by having a different student body than the adjacent schools.
I attended Pittsburgh Public Schools and then a neighboring suburban district. The quality disparity is not even close. I don't know if the administrators just have lower expectations, but the Pittsburgh Public Schools go at a much slower pace than they should. My school in PPS only had about 5-10% black kids at the time. The quality of education was incredibly inferior, because we weren't pushed to learn at a quicker pace. Race had nothing to do with it.
I can't speak to the impact of race on education in PPS today. You seem to feel it's an issue but don't want to be labeled as saying such.
What I'm saying is that at the end of the day, the city schools don't produce the end results that most neighboring suburban schools do. When those kids go out into the workforce, with college experience or not, employers aren't going to ask, "What was the racial make-up of your high school?". They're going to look at what the potential employee can bring to the table.
Last edited by interested_burgher; 05-06-2012 at 09:29 PM..
Sorry, I should have said a 50% graduation rate. Obviously, that's not impressive by even your standards. Contrast it to neighboring districts like Brentwood and Baldwin, both of whom are solidly above 90%.
Carrick High School has a graduation rate of 94%. I agree that Pittsburgh Public Schools are not the best, but I checked and even Westinghouse High School is higher than 50%.
Carrick High School has a graduation rate of 94%. I agree that Pittsburgh Public Schools are not the best, but I checked and even Westinghouse High School is higher than 50%.
Carrick High School has a graduation rate of 63%.........and that's allowing for FIVE years to graduate!
Last edited by interested_burgher; 05-06-2012 at 11:17 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
