Jim over at R2P: Return To Pittsburgh has an unsettling little article out of Newark, NJ:
... "Newark needs people living downtown to realize fully its burgeoning revitalization," Goldman tells GlobeSt.com. "Throughout the country and the world--in places like London, Los Angeles and Pittsburgh--arts centers have led the way in transforming cities. There is every reason to believe that Newark can be the next major urban success story."Jim adds, "For better or for worse, Pittsburgh is clearly a best-practice model for a number of struggling cities throughout the country."
Frankly, that's the most disturbing thing that I think I've read on the Burghosphere recently: Newark wants to be Pittsburgh.
Perhaps it was the Superbowl, but it seems like we've seen a lot of publicity recently about Pittsburgh being a, well, great place to live. Now, don't get me wrong: I love this place and I do, in fact, think that this is a great place to live.
Articles like the one above, however, seem to imply that what we're doing is part of a consistent, planned strategy, instead of an ad hoc grouping of interests and piecemeal policy decisions. Indeed, certain policy decisions *cough*assessments*cough* would seem to be really, really... well, bad and not conducive at all to redevelopment.
All I can figure is either (a) Pittsburgh is hiding its incompetence really well, (b) we're actually doing something right, (c) other Cities are doing exceptionally bad, or (d) we've been down so long in Pittsburgh, we don't know which way is up.
I hope it's (b) or (d), but I'll wager it's (a).