Things you wouldn't mind getting "redeveloped?" (Pittsburgh, Oakland: live, mall)

[LIRefugee]

Originally Posted by alleghenyangel

I wouldn't mind going back to 1900, actually. Then we could go back to pre-automobile Pittsburgh, and use streetcars (yes, I am aware that fostered suburbanization, too). I was born much too late.

Albeit close-in suburbanization. The streetcar suburbs were still densely-settled places (and some were annexed to be urbs).

[Copanut]

Loved riding street cars, hated riding the bus.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

Any public housing project that is occupying prime land. Even including ones aimed at seniors. Not necessarily demolishing them, but at least re-purposing them into market rate units. If we're going to have public housing, that's fine, but offer good public transit and other services instead of locating it on prime land.

Why should the poor not get to live in the nice parts of town? The public housing would have to be replaced, either with new projects (ugh!) or more Section 8.

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

I don't think you have appreciation for the fact that not everyone wants to live in the city.

If we returned to 1949, we'd be a smoke filled industrial powerhouse with filthy rivers and a working class that would be earning good money in manufacturing and transportation. With all that money, they'd grow tired of the crowded and polluted city, and they'd look to buy some of that forest land to clear and build a little green estate of their own. Before you know it, downtown stores would open branches near the new homes. And soon we'd be back where we were.

I wish I could double rep you for this! 1949 was the year of my birth. I can remember Pittsburgh (vaguely), also Beaver Falls and the other mill towns, when they were still grimy and smoky. The above is exactly what happened.

[airwave09]

Hazelwood needs to be redeveloped like yesterday. It is a natural extension for Oakland and the Southside and is in such a highly visible location for traffic coming into or out of the city via the parkway east.

Add into that the location along the river and trail and being very close to downtown and the waterfront, and the fact that its essentially a clean flat slate for redevelopment. This is a no-brainer to me for these reasons.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by Katiana

Why should the poor not get to live in the nice parts of town? The public housing would have to be replaced, either with new projects (ugh!) or more Section 8.

"Nice part of town" and "prime land" aren't synonyms in my book. I don't want to see housing projects in the Hill or Fineview anymore than I do Shadyside or Bloomfield. All of the urban core is prime land due to the proximity to downtown and Oakland.

I think the problem with your line of thinking is that it treats the poor as if they will always be poor. Public housing should not be treated as a permanent solution for anybody (excepting the mentally ill and physically disabled perhaps), it should be interim housing until you can get back on your own financially. If you change the goal of the program like that then I don't think you would have to replace them with an equivalent number of new projects or section 8.

[szug-bot]

Originally Posted by airwave09

Hazelwood needs to be redeveloped like yesterday. It is a natural extension for Oakland and the Southside...

...This is a no-brainer to me for these reasons.

i dont agree with this. i dont think of it as a 'natural extension of Oakland'. its pretty much a speedway for suburban commuters.

you need demand, investment money, a plan (which takes money to develop). i dont think its a 'no-brainer'. hazelwood has those attributes you mentioned, but its not ready to take advantage of any big break. i dont even think there is an active neighborhood group there. (there are plenty of drugs, though!)

i think they should first redesign traffic flow on Irvine Street (which is either accurately or not referred to as Second Avenue, since the real second avenue was closed off between greenfield and hazelwood aves.).

im hoping it might benefit from a better overall national economy when and if some home buyers might find bargains there and improve the homes along second avenue (the houses on the one side are not 1/2 bad in size or appearance!), thereby improving the aesthetics, as a start.

[Garvdog]

Station Square (the indoor mall part) desperately needs a remodel, or a razing so they can use the land for some other commercial purpose. It's going to turn into a mini-Century III soon- an outdated, sad relic of the 1980s. The outdoor section where the Hard Rock Cafe is can stay.

[PreservationPioneer]

Station Square is a historic landmark, is it not? I believe it was the adaptive re-use of the historic P&LE Railroad Depot, and a revolutionary one, at that. It's not your typical mall and razing it would be a great loss.

[Copanut]

I'd rather they tear down the Hard Rock before they do anything to Station Square, that thing is a sad relic of the 80's era.

[ML North]

This building on the 3600 block of Forbes would make a really nice restoration project. It's an awesome old building and cleaning up its facade would really improve the aesthetic of the Forbes corridor through Oakland.