Anybody here hate the mills as much as me? (Pittsburgh: credit, buy)

[kpoeppel]

Well I meant up and down the river...but yes, I forgot about the locks and dams. That would be a big problem.

[Katiana]

Originally Posted by livecontent

There are many walkable communities in the suburbs and in Denver.

I am a strong advocate of public transit and I try to walk, as much as possible. In the suburbs, a neighborhood is more defined and anchored by a grocery store. A large grocery store would be equivalent to 5-12 small stores in a neighborhood, over 50 years ago.

You have the butcher, you have a bakery, there is a deli, a flower shop, a dry grocer, a green grocer, a pharmacy, now we have a video store, a bank----and that is in a standard size King Soopers or Safeway.

When we look at super stores like a super Walmart--we have an addition of a hardware store, an auto service center, clothing store, appliances, sewing center, hardware sho, even now medical offices , optician, photo shop
restaurants, etc.

So what I am saying a grocery store, in itself, is a small community of stores that are bigger and have more then small neighborhoods of the past. A walkable communty can be only a grocery store that is easily walkable and have numerous stores. If you live in older areas of the suburbs, you will see grocery stores surrounded by housing vs. off a main traffic street.


I am not impressed by any builder who defines a walkable neighborhood with only overpriced yuppie stores, surrounded by a overpriced development and away from public transit and accessible only by highways.

I have problems with some gentrification neigborhoods that have developed such high rents that the only stores that are there are overpriced fancy little shops that do not serve everyday needs.
Livecontent

(Edited by pittnurse70)

From the Denver forum. I think a very good point was made about the grocery stores and discount stores of today being the equivalent of many stores of old, and how grocery stores anchor some suburban neighborhoods. I see many of my friends and neighbors at the store.

Originally Posted by Stagger Lee

Pittsburghers are just a bunch of backwards thinking yinzers waving big yellow towels drinking Iron city. You guys arn't as high class like me. I live in a yuppity highscale condo, drinking wine that is specially imported from France, and I shop at a local high scale food store. I don't go to those WalMarts like you Pions.

Now that is smug..................

Flattery will get you nowhere.

Originally Posted by kpoeppel

If the river towns are dying, it is because the mode of transportation today is completely different than when those towns were first founded. When rivers were the only "highways", the development grew along the rivers. Now the development grows along highways. It's only natural.

Rivers, however, do have an allure that highways don't...recreational use. Boating, fishing, sightseeing, etc. Perhaps the old river towns will see some new development related to these activities. I think I read somewhere that Allegheny County has one of the highest per-capita boat ownership rates in the nation. During the fourth-of-July fireworks, the rivers are PACKED with pleasure boats, etc.

Another possibility would be commuting by boat! Pittsburgh is one of the few cities where that might be possible, since the rivers snake through all sorts of suburban areas. I could definitely see river towns becoming "Chic" among "yuppie" types if Pittsburgh could attract enough of them. I lived briefly near Petaluma, CA just north of San Franciso. There are lots of new condos going up along their river front, which was once an industrial area...just like the Pittsburgh river towns.

Just think...ferry service along the rivers connecting river towns with condos close to the water. Could it work? I know commuting by ferry in Seattle is considered trendy...perhaps in Pittsburgh some day?

Guylocke...any thoughts on this idea?

I know you asked guylocke, but the history of some of the river towns is not river transportation, of people anyway. Many of these steel towns were built on rivers to take advantage of the transporting of the raw materials. In Beaver Falls, anyway, there was no river travel to speak of. The city is all on the west bank of the river. There have been bridges across the river for at least 100 yrs, before the days of heavy auto use. I don't think the Beaver River is particularly navigable. That is just one example. In Seattle, the ferries travel to places where building a bridge would be impractical, e.g. miles across Puget Sound. In Germany, where I was this spring, there seemed to be a lot of ferries across the Rhine. However, some of them only ran a couple of times a day. It would probably not work with our lifestyle to do so much waiting.

[vwscottie]

Originally Posted by Stagger Lee

It is really making me considering moving back out to Portland.

Good, see ya!

[guylocke]

Good, see ya!

Don't mind vwscottie, he has a hard time distinguishing appropriateness.

[vwscottie]

Originally Posted by guylocke

Don't mind vwscottie, he has a hard time distinguishing appropriateness.

Hey, if you dont like it, don't tell us how unhappy you are, just leave.

[guylocke]

Hey, if you dont like it, don't tell us how unhappy you are, just leave.

If every person in every city just "left" because they were unhappy, or unhappy about one particular issue, there would be mass confusion in the world and complete instability!!

lol.

[vwscottie]

Originally Posted by guylocke

If every person in every city just "left" because they were unhappy, or unhappy about one particular issue, there would be mass confusion in the world and complete instability!!

lol.

Its kind of a pointless thing to whine about though.

There's always one in a crowd who doesnt want to see the Wal Marts and whoever else taking up large parcels of land and then drive business away from local businesses. Like I said earlier, if people are so truly, genuinely upset over this, then they shoudln't support those stores/plazzas/malls. The fact of the matter is, the largest percentage of people will, so it's kind of a lost cause.

[guylocke]

Like I said earlier, if people are so truly, genuinely upset over this, then they shoudln't support those stores/plazzas/malls.

Well I don't necessarily whine about it on the forums, but I refuse to step foot into walmart. I mean, I'm all about certain aspects of corporate America.

I love Target, Best Buy, and would die without my Starbucks, but I think Walmart is in a whole other ball park.

I was just reading a really exciting article on msn.com where analysts believe Walmart has maybe hit its peak and is plateauing, hopefully soon to decline.

People, like myself, would much rather spend a few extra bucks at a place that provides a much better shopper experience, has nicer things, and with a company that actually treats its employees well *cough Target cough* than go to Walmart.

It was really amazing to hear that just recently, certain companies are actually making exclusive contracts with say, Target, or Cotsco, because they don't fear Walmart like they once did. For a while, and pretty much still, if you don't do what Walmart wants, you're done.

Game over.

[Katiana]

In what way does Target treat its employees better than Wal Mart? I am curious.

A friend's son worked at Best Buy in college and summers. Their policy is benfits for full time workers. Many weeks in summer, he was scheduled for 39 hrs so they wouldn't have to pay him benes.

[vwscottie]

Originally Posted by pittnurse70

In what way does Target treat its employees better than Wal Mart? I am curious.

A friend's son worked at Best Buy in college and summers. Their policy is benfits for full time workers. Many weeks in summer, he was scheduled for 39 hrs so they wouldn't have to pay him benes.

That doesn't make sense; I've been in retail for 18 years and have worked both for Best Buy and WalMart, and generally the cut off for benefits is 28 hours.