BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

That kickstarter isn't quite right: There's a chicken takeout place that often has long lines down the street from his place. There's also Bell's Market that sells meats and vegetables and other random groceries.There's also a farm stand on Saturdays from like May to October. If what Kevin is saying he wants to do actually happens, great, but I'm concerned it will just be another in a growing list of examples of people from out of town moving in, bringing in what they want, what attracts the kind of people they want to attract, and doesn't actually provide any value to residents already there. I think Kevin's other restaurants fit squarely into that category (edited to be less snarky)

I just don't see how Braddock ever comes back unless people start investing money in it, and they'll only do that if they think they're going to, eventually, make money from their investment. And given the current situation they'll need all the government help available to get them to do it. And I can see a Kevin Sousa restaurant being enough of a draw that people would visit Braddock just to eat there, which would make it a whole lot easier for other nearby businesses to get off the ground.

To me, the important question is, how does the neighborhood want to "come back?" The neighborhood didn't go anywhere. People have been living there all along. People still live there. What do you want a neighborhood to look like? What does the neighborhood want to look like? Not everyplace has to look like Butler St in Lawrenceville, Liberty Ave in Bloomfield or Penn Ave in Garfield. The problem (and I know very little about gentrification) is that people come in from outside of neighborhoods and insert what THEY want and what THEY think the neighborhood should look like and be. They see cheap land and buildings as a resource to be used to insert their own image of a good neighborhood and a source of profits down the road. This attracts similar people with similar mindsets. People who like Kevin's trendy restaurants are probably more likely to buy property around his restaurants. That's great for Kevin, but for the low income residents who were there first, they get displaced by increasingly higher rents, can't cover increasingly large mortgages as building prices increase, and eventually have to move further out of the city. It's a very United States ethos to see a space being underutilized by our own standards and then to displace the residents while claiming progress and pointing to new shiny buildings as evidence of such. What's wrong with a poor, working class neighborhood? We have to live somewhere and an expensive restaurant isn't going to help us out, as far as I know

Pierce wrote:People have been living there all along. People still live there.

But a lot fewer live there now. Braddock went from over 20K to under 3K now. And the people living there now are a lot poorer than the people who lived there back in its heyday. There are ways to develop neighborhoods that don't push the poor out. You can do mixed-income development. I think some of that is happening here in Pittsburgh. I think that Fetterman spends a lot of time talking with Braddock residents, and he's definitely supporting this restaurant. So that's about as good an expression of what people there want as you could ask for.

"What does *the neighborhood* want to look like?" Precisely. I was tempted to throw in something like, "Well, they could use a bike shop," but even that is impressing something that I value on a set of people who may not particularly value or want one. Getting back to something I said in a thread earlier this year, what I'd like to do is get a few people in a room, who actually live there and value the place, to figure out what they want, in what order, in what way, and on what timeline, and then try to help them get to that. And maybe some of that is to define what they do not want or value, or yeah-maybe-but-later. It has to come from within. I just want to play catalyst, or hope that someone else does so.

Pierce wrote:

To me, the important question is, how does the neighborhood want to “come back?” The neighborhood didn’t go anywhere. People have been living there all along. People still live there. What do you want a neighborhood to look like? What does the neighborhood want to look like?

I think that is the crux of the question. It's easy to play armchair quarterback and come up with all sorts of ideas on what "they" need...as Stu points out, the opinions of actual residents are far more valuable then theorizing from a safe distance. Of course, by the same token, I also wonder how much value there is in second-guessing such developments, at least by those of us who don't live there and aren't privy to community meetings and local politics. If Mr. Sousa is indeed working with the mayor, local businesses, and local non-profits, I find it hard, at least from a distance, to differentiate that from working with *the community.*

@Pierce, if you want to learn about gentrification and related land use issues from a legal prespective, you should study the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Kelo v. City of New London, as well as some scholarly articles that have been published in response to that decision. If you want to see whether a real high end restaurant can gentrify a working class Pittsburgh neighborhood, ride over to Allentown and take a look at the blocks surrounding the Alla Famiglia restaurant. That is a much better restaurant that anything you will find in any of the city's "gentrified" neighborhoods, and yet the surrounding working class neighborhood has long been - and for the foreseeable future will be - a mix of reasonably well-kept properties, run down properties and full-on blight.

BTW, it looks like this is actually going to happen. He's up to $215K as of this writing, with a little over a day to go.

Any kind of economic activity is probably good, even if it's due to the presence of a "nice" restaurant. It will bring jobs, likely for some residents. In any case, people working there might want to live close by, maybe even fix a place up (note: waitstaff and cooks are not "gentry"). They'll want to shop someplace convenient, like down the street. The restaurant will need suppliers, maybe even some located in the neighborhood (whose employees probably live around there). And so on. It's not fracking, so let's see.

As previously mentioned, I've seen them working on the building all summer. I go by it five times a week on my commute. Unless they were intending to build a greenhouse on the roof and remodel an entire building just for the hell of it, the thing was going to happen either way Ahlir, it's a slippery slope to being Penn Ave in Garfield. When I moved here in late 2007, pretty much all that was there was Spak Bros and The Quiet Storm. (Well, that's all that stood out to me, as a vegan) The Quiet Storm is now closed because it was essentially priced out of the neighborhood. When I first went there, there were boarded up buildings all around it. Now look at Penn Ave. Does all the crap on Penn Ave benefit people who live\lived in Garfield before 2007? My hunch, which census data should reveal, is that the people who were in Garfield are slowly being displaced by more affluent people moving in. I don't equate economic activity that displaces residents as good. It's also funny you mention fracking because I imagine the restaurant is going to be using natural gas, which is a product of fracking. Heh

Braddock has a lot of empty space, and a lot of what buildings are there should be pulled down and replaced. I think we have a long way to go before gentrification becomes a problem. btw, my sources on Facebook say they made the goal.

@Pierce: -- There is nothing wrong with economic activity per se. The issue, as always, is how the benefits get distributed (or not). -- I'm also curious about Garfield demographics. I haven't seen much change north of Penn over the past while. In any case if you look closer it's really, as a whole, more of a mixed community and has been all along. -- The reference to fracking had to do with how gas companies (enabled by their stooge Corbett) have been able to screw people out of their property and health, and pollute the state for the rest of us. A localvore restaurant is less likely to operate that way.

I admire anyone who would take a chance on a down-and-out community, I wish him and Braddock well. But what the residents probably need is an old fashioned family style restaurant or dinner, a hardware store, 5&10, etc. Maybe if the gentrified-like establishments become successful then the more utilitarian ones will follow. I see this as a big positive.

^Marko, this grass-roots effort looks interesting... http://www.freestore15104.org/#!redlantern/cyqs http://www.popcitymedia.com/features/giselefetterman031313.aspx The hospital closing was a hardship on many...

Well, it looks like the people have spoken and this ambitious endeavor is moving forward: http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/5368376-74/sousa-braddock-project#axzz2peEg01IC From the end of the article: "Sousa hopes to open his restaurant in early 2015. Superior Motors will embrace farm-to-table dining, utilizing produce from a two-acre urban farm one block away, a rooftop greenhouse and additional roof space to accommodate a raised-bed garden. The restaurant will provide professional culinary training and opportunities at no cost to residents." I also understand, from speaking with someone who donated, that the pricing for residents will be means-based so that people who live in Braddock aren't priced out of dining there.

Pierce wrote: ... an expensive restaurant isn’t going to help us out, as far as I know

Pierce, the answer to your comment can be found above, for what that's worth. Also, with all due respect, you might also consider the old quote from Sen. Pat Moynihan: "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." It will certainly be interesting to see whether this succeeds; I hope it does.

I like the sliding scale concept. I find Sousa's other restaurants to be expensive. OTOH, perhaps it is because he pays staff a living wage and/or benefits. Does anyone here know if that is the case?

Jacob McCrea wrote:Sen. Pat Moynihan: “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.”

It should be noted that Moynihan said that well before the invention of the Internet, which has indeed made it possible for us all to have our own facts. The sliding scale concept sounds like one of those hippie liberal concepts that would be really hard to administer. Are Braddock residents all going to be issued income verification cards? But in any case, I'm glad there's now going to be a good reason to ride to Braddock.

It's nice to see this go forward. Plus, he seems like a really good guy trying to do good things. Really wish it were going to be kosher. BEGIN RANT At first glance, whether customers come from the community, people are employed from the community, or even if not, anything (well, excepting maybe strip joints) is better for the community than more vacant store fronts. The this doesn't look right around here, must be creeping gentrification, must kill, instinct is really, really disturbing. Now, I'm not so clueless as to fail to understand at least some of where it comes from. Way, way too few low income folks own and even for the few that do, property taxes post revaluation post major renewal can drive people out. And don't even get me started into how this economic based sorting and broken tax policy feeds into school funding, intensifying the sorting and narrowing opportunities for those who can't pay up, thereby crystalizing class divisions indefinitely. That's where I wish the attention were, the underlying problems that make even good things threatening, not the good things themselves. I'd like to think it's at least because these problems are generally perceived as too entrenched, but my fear is rather that these are too entrenched to be generally perceived as the problem. END RANT

@Jacob "Well, it looks like the people have spoken and this ambitious endeavor is moving forward:" You mean the people with money who would fund this kind of thing. I wonder how many dollars came from Braddock and from how many sources "Also, with all due respect, you might also consider the old quote from Sen. Pat Moynihan: “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.” You mean like the fact that the video starts off by saying their isn't a restaurant or access to fresh food in Braddock, both of which are false. Not to mention, the idea that residents are going to get fresh food from a restaurant is ludicrous. That's like going to the ER to get aspirin. Totally cost prohibitive and wasteful. @Pseudacris "I also understand, from speaking with someone who donated, that the pricing for residents will be means-based so that people who live in Braddock aren’t priced out of dining there." For a low income neighborhood, any eating out can be considered priced out. I don't think anybody on this board is poor enough to understand that. I also doubt many residents are going to step foot in the place, regardless of whether or not Kevin gives them charity prices. I'd like to point out again that all the things he's saying he'll do, he could already do at his other restaurants, but hasn't. I guess the location based discount is understandable, because he's counting on either a) local people not eating there and b) the majority of patrons coming from out of the neighborhood. @jonawebb "But in any case, I’m glad there’s now going to be a good reason to ride to Braddock." There's already plenty of reasons to ride to Braddock. We have the first Carnegie Library, which has an open ceramic lab among other things. We have the Edgar Thomson Steel Works, which is over 100 years old and produces something like 25% of the nation's steel. We have nice people. I know my neighbors better here than in any of the other neighborhoods I've lived in in Pittsburgh. But no, we don't, as of yet, have some expensive restaurant for wealthy urbanites who like to look down upon other neighborhoods with old non-metalic, non-floor to ceiling window storefronts, and non-new buildings. But just wait a year, then you can ride in here and think you're turning around Braddock by buying a $20 plate of something. We're all holding our breath waiting for the opportunity for you to save us.

@byogman property taxes post revaluation post major renewal can drive people out. That's not actually true because our county has been fighting assessments for about two decades now. See this blog post for a more in-depth explanation: http://pghisacity.blogspot.com/2011/01/onoratos-last-stand-on-property-tax.html Building and rent prices drive people out far, far, far faster than taxes ever will. I'm pretty sure people are already either sitting on or actively prospectively buying property on Braddock Ave (in Braddock) in a manner similar to what has occurred on Penn Ave in Garfield

@Pierce,, you've mistakenly attributed Jacob's statement to me... please correct if possible... I have mixed feelings abut the project. Mostly wondering if the higher prices are evidence of the staff making living wages. thx

@Stu "I think we have a long way to go before gentrification becomes a problem." I'd point to Penn on Garfield again for a comparison. Look how fast that neighborhood has changed

Pierce wrote:There’s already plenty of reasons to ride to Braddock.

I've visited the library there, so I saw that. It's nice enough, but don't see a reason to visit again. And it's not like Edgar Thomson has tours. All I'm saying is, Braddock is one way I could ride home. I've ridden through it a number of times. It has interesting history and public art. I'd like to spend some money there and support the neighborhood. It would be nice to call up my wife sometime and say, "Meet me in Braddock, we'll do ____". There's nothing to fill in the blank.

Pierce wrote:Building and rent prices drive people out far, far, far faster than taxes ever will. I’m pretty sure people are already either sitting on or actively prospectively buying property on Braddock Ave (in Braddock) in a manner similar to what has occurred on Penn Ave in Garfield

Well, on the one hand, I like optimism. And you can't get away from supply and demand. But to the extent building height restrictions and parking minimums contribute to a supply crunch and drive rent higher that makes us all poorer, and of course it's the already poor who are most adversely impacted. Working against that crap is also very complementary to biking advocacy and visa versa.

To look at this development from a positive perspective (Imagine that, me?!) - If this restaurant brings more people and activity to Braddock, crime and illegal activities are less likely to occur there, and the people who do live there become safer. Even apart from the job opportunities and positive associations that the restaurant itself will bring. It is exactly the same as - when more cyclists are on the road, all cyclists become safer. I know very little about gentrification in Garfield, but I know that I will go there now with some level of comfort, and I would not have 10 years ago. I am as skeptical of "developers" as anyone alive, but attempting to make sure that economically disadvantaged people have affordable housing by rejecting any economic development is the worst possible methodology. Also, it's not like Sousa is TGI Fridays. If I am not mistaken, he moved his family and now lives in Braddock. And Fetterman, who certainly had an infinite number of other options in life, has been trying to help Braddock from the inside out for a decade.

I have mixed feelings about it too, but I gave him some cash anyways. I think his intentions are good, but you know what they say about that... hopefully the positives will balance out the negatives. If it does develop into a culinary school, that is something the area could certainly use. Pierce does raise a lot of good points. I used to go to the old Station Street and the hotdogs were like $1.50. Now they're 6 or 7 bucks. Granted, it's a different (I won't necessarily say better) type of hotdog, but that doesn't change the fact that a lot of people were priced out. Why not continue to offer the plain $1.50 dog as an option? So, I'm skeptical of it being a place where local residents will go. "Nobody on this board understands" is an unfounded and misplaced assumption, though.

edmonds59 wrote:

I am as skeptical of “developers” as anyone alive, but attempting to make sure that economically disadvantaged people have affordable housing by rejecting any economic development is the worst possible methodology.

That. Not to mention the obvious point that, if the development is being done by people who actually live there, by definition it's part of the community. There's a significant difference between gentrification imposed from outside, and bootstrapping coming from within.

Speaking of facts, I pulled up the census data on 15224, which includes Penn Ave in Garfield, parts of Liberty Ave and Friendship A five percentage population change is hard to notice by just looking around to Ahlir's point, but I think my assumptions are correct. Black people have been moving out, median income has drastically increased along with the percentage of high earners. So that's great for those high earners, but no so great for people being pushed out. This is part of a larger national trend. They're still being poor somewhere else

I can understand a certain feeling of pride in a place that's rough around the edges. I'm even given to a little humblebrag every now and then about my adventures in very rough parts in east cleveland back when I was a poor student. And something upscale replacing downscale, that can be pretty sad indeed. Replacing an empty storefront however? Now I know, I know what you're saying. One can very much follow the other. I don't know that it's guaranteed, but if it is, the economics of it is basically saying something I can find close mirror to in my own life. I don't mind being some place rough myself, but as I became a family man that changed and I wound up spending money that made me frankly ill to park myself in Squirrel Hill. " But I won't cry for yesterday. There's an ordinary world. Somehow I have to find. " (OK, it's a song for actual lost love, it fits well enough to the circumstance and is in my head. So there.)

When I first moved to Braddock (I actually live in North Braddock for full disclosure, which has different characteristics and almost twice the population of Braddock itself) I heard a lot of concern about how "dangerous" it was. For example, my brother was worried who lives in Glassport. But we had nearly identical crime statistics and they're both actually lower in crime than the City of Pittsburgh on a whole. If memory serves me right, they were lower than Greenfield too, which is where I moved from

edmonds59 wrote:If this restaurant brings more people and activity to Braddock, crime and illegal activities are less likely to occur there, and the people who do live there become safer.

I'm not sure I would agree. Do you think the Southside is safer now than it was 25 years ago? How about the crime the Strip District experienced back in the late 90's when all the clubs opened? I go through Braddock very infrequently but I've always felt safe when passing through, or as safe as one can feel on empty streets with nothing open. Back in the 80's I think it was very unsafe, but now I jokingly comment that even the drug dealers have abandoned Braddock, but to some extent I think that's true. As with most things in this life, crime follows the money. BTW, when my mother was a child she and my grandmother would take a streetcar from town to shop in Braddock. Apparently they had nicer dress shops than downtown Pittsburgh had in the 40's. Even in the early 70's Braddock had a full complement of stores and such. It's been a long and slow decline.

Pierce wrote:Black people have been moving out, median income has drastically increased along with the percentage of high earners... They’re still being poor somewhere else

I don't think the data you cited support this conclusion. There's been a decline in population, with many more blacks leaving than whites, and an increase in wealth. Does that mean that the poor have left and stayed poor, stayed and are better off, or left for better opportunities?

Marko82 wrote:

I’m not sure I would agree. Do you think the Southside is safer now than it was 25 years ago? How about the crime the Strip District experienced back in the late 90?s when all the clubs opened?

That's a good point, but I suspect you've got a less volatile (i.e., less likely to get drunk and stupid) target demographic for patrons of a sit-down restaurant, as opposed to the bar-n-club crowd.

I found this graph which is mind-numbing; a 90% decrease in population. Think about supply & demand and the value of property.

Holy crap, Marko. That's terrifying. You know, your comment about supply&demand and the value of property makes me wonder; how many of the current residents own versus rent, and how many of the rental properties there are owned by residents? It would be valuable to know the answers to those questions, before jumping to any conclusions regarding the benefits or detriments of increased property values.

Marko82 wrote:Do you think the Southside is safer now than it was 25 years ago? How about the crime the Strip District experienced back in the late 90?s when all the clubs opened?

Interesting question, I don't know. I lived on the S. Side 30+- yrs ago, it was never in the condition of Braddock, it was always very residential, no hot restaurants or bars, but no empty storefronts either. Quite boring actually. The Strip was different as well. No one lived in the currently active section, and it seemed like when the night spots opened, it instantly attracted the worst of humanity, precisely because it was perceived that no one was around who would care. Still, I'm not going off data, just perceptions. Interesting, though.

the census data on 15224, which includes Penn Ave in Garfield, parts of Liberty Ave and Friendship I pulled this up: 15224 is basically Bloomfield and Friendship, with a big chunk of Garfield though weighted to the "nice" parts (i.e. up the hill). And there's this a bizarrely carved-out portion of the cemetery. I would hazard that the bulk of the population characteristics are accounted for by Friendship and Bloomfield and that they account for the income shifts. The specific drop in black population on the other hand is maybe not that easily accounted for. Now, if you search for "population garfield pittsburgh" most of the discussion seems to be about de-population, certainly for the 2000-2010 difference. The Garfield problem appears to be many people streaming out, with not that many coming in. (Yes, you get fewer rich white people per sq.ft. than poor black people; but that can't account for all of the effect.)

^My impression is that the South Side's current crime woes stem, in no small part, from the old Strip District's macho, somewhat trashy and mostly fake-as-a-$3 bill party scene moving there when the Strip District clubs closed. But that's just an impression that I have, and not one that's based on experience.

Pierce wrote:When I first moved to Braddock (I actually live in North Braddock for full disclosure, which has different characteristics and almost twice the population of Braddock itself) I heard a lot of concern about how “dangerous” it was.

I heard the same paranoid bullshit when I bought a commercial building in Allentown, which a few commenters on this thread have visited. Four years later I haven't been robbed, the place hasn't been robbed, and it wasn't robbed during the 30+ years the prior owner had the place. Also, I'd sooner expect to get robbed in the South Side or Shadyside than Braddock or Allentown. Also worth noting is that Braddock recently went 5+ years without a homicide. I'll try to comment further tomorrow as this is an interesting discussion. Between fixing up my own property, having a good friend who is turning a long-vacant building in Homestead into what I'd call a "blue collar" blues bar and restaurant, and having other friends renovating long-vacant commercial property down the road, these issues are familiar and interesting to me.

Pierce wrote:What’s wrong with a poor, working class neighborhood? We have to live somewhere and an expensive restaurant isn’t going to help us out, as far as I know

Any restaurant in any neighborhood could be a source of work. Nothing wrong with creating some jobs right in the town itself. Some may be able to walk to work. I see nothing wrong with that.

Marko82 wrote:How about the crime the Strip District experienced back in the late 90?s when all the clubs opened?

Being an old fart, I can tell you the Strip had about no crime back when there was just Metropol. As soon as that dump Whiskey Dicks moved in the area changed. Brought in the power drinkers/fighters and then the thug crowd with guns instead of people wanting to listen to music, dance and have a good time. I talked to the guy that owned Metropol and he told me as soon as Whiskey opened, it was the beginning of the end. He was right.

jonawebb wrote:I’ve ridden through it a number of times. It has interesting history and public art. I’d like to spend some money there and support the neighborhood. It would be nice to call up my wife sometime and say, “Meet me in Braddock, we’ll do ____”. There’s nothing to fill in the blank.

Jon, I feel the same way about Braddock - interesting stuff, no "place" to go. If I may, there is Braddock Community Cafe, Mon-Thur, Noon-5pm https://www.facebook.com/BraddockCommunityCafe I love that place. Local, organic food, reasonable priced. When it gets to springtime, there's this: http://pghmurals.com/N6.cfm Riding/walking tour of public art, with references. Jon's right that it is limited and NotQuiteThere. Here's a funny sentence: It's not as attractive and interesting as Millvale. As Hyla noted, they have just recently opened up a quasi-FreeRide shop, the Red Lantern (invoking the Lanterne Rouge of TourDeFrance) http://www.freestore15104.org/#!redlantern/cyqs I am fond of the place, and I think that cyclists (via the GAP trail and the Rankin Bridge) could be visitors from the outside who help, and maybe we'll be very welcome there.

Is it too soon to think about where to locate some bike racks and a corral?

Thanks, @Vannevar, that's useful. And the comparison to Millvale brings to mind Jean-Marc's, which is out of the price range of most Millvale residents, I would think, but which works very well as a point of interest and reason to visit the town. Let's hope Sousa's restaurant plays a similar role in Braddock.

Just as an aside, an outfit called the "Westmoreland Heritage Trail Association" is in the process of building a trail from Saltsburg to Trafford (just a hop, skip, and jump from Braddock), and they hope to connect to the GAP at some point. There is no indication of the final route they have in mind, but I bet it sure wouldn't hurt for folks on that side of town to get involved and drop nuggets about how freaking awesome it would be to connect to the GAP through Braddock and the Rankin Bridge. Because that would be freaking awesome. http://www.co.westmoreland.pa.us/DocumentCenter/View/2632 That thought had occurred to me by way of this, which is amazing: http://vimeo.com/83038414

Heck yeah. Helps some with the waterfront situation (though, grumble, rankin bridge as a crossing is 3 miles longer than using homestead grays for me). But also, a nice way at least to get to the base of some roads climbing toward monroeville. Also presumably would run past turtle creek, which to me, just by the way the roads converge on it, like an excellent eastern multi-modal transit hube. Possibilities abound.

I just reread and rewatched the video/kickstarter page. So it says "Superior Motors will serve fresh, local and thoughtfully crafted food in a true urban food desert. In fact, Braddock does not have a restaurant functioning within its borders; fast food or otherwise." Now I don't know if the cafe or takeout chicken place would qualify as a "restaurant" to Kevin or if the weekly farm stand (in season) or Bell's Market help alleviate the claim of being a food desert, but none of the already established things in town were mentioned or put in their little map either. From the Braddock Community Cafe: "The Braddock Youth Project and Braddock Redux have created the Braddock Community Cafe which will provide healthy, local food in an area currently designated as a food desert, create more opportunities for hands on training and create a source of sustainable income for BYP. Braddock Redux will house the cafe in a reclaimed church that they have transformed into the Nyia Page Community Center and provide financial support while BYP will create menus, provide information on food issues and offer community events like family style dinners and cooking demonstrations." Does that not strike anybody else as odd? Perhaps it was just an oversight. To refer back to my original post, I hope the restaurant works, but am wary, and starting off by questionably interpreting what's already here doesn't ease my mind

I haven't talked to anyone from the WHT recently but there was a rarely used and hoping to be abandoned line along Turtle Creek into Trafford that they were hoping to obtain. After that, there are some sections along the rest of Turtle Creek that look promising but from Wall down to the Mon River there's a lot of industrial and active rail. Rail-with-Trail was talked about but I considered that to be more pipe dream than anything else.

Generally, "restaurant" implies sit-down meals, a variety of options made to order, and a primary purpose of food service rather than alcohol service. So, McDonalds would qualify; a walk-up Dairy Queen would not; nor would a Starbucks (even though you can technically buy a sandwich or some oatmeal and sit to eat it). Of course, I'm making this up off the top of my head...I'm not aware of any formal definitions, but that's what pops to mind when I think "restaurant". I suppose we could have lengthy threads devoted to discussing the differences between that, and a cafe, and a food truck, and Sheetz for that matter...

So I guess the place can be the first to offer fresh food made to order from a wide menu array. Not first to offer fresh food or depending on what the cafe has, not even first to offer items from a menu, but first to offer a wide array of items on a menu. That just doesn't sound like the video If the video was like "Hey, Braddock has this cool cafe (which has culinary training too), an independently owned small grocer, a chicken place and a farm stand and we'd like to add to and compliment what's already here," that'd be great. But instead, the video portrays Braddock as a near ghost town and makes Kevin seem like some kind of Moses leading the people back to a prosperous Braddock. Great for getting money, not so great for speaking truth to what's actually here

I agree with Dan and don't see where Kevin did not tell truth.

@Pierce, in my experience, entrepreneurs tend to be pretty self-promotional people, and they sometimes play fast and loose with the truth. From what you're saying, Kevin Sousa has emphasized the deficiencies of Braddock in order to get people to contribute money. But he didn't lie. He's not under any obligation to present a nuanced view of the current food situation in Braddock; that's not his job.

Fetterman runs the Braddock Youth Project, and founded Braddock Redux, which runs the Braddock Community Cafe, and he was integrally involved with the Kickstarter Project. If there was anything objectionable about the way Superior Motors is being presented, I'm more than happy to leave that up to him to comment on.

I remember that part of the discussion about UPMC closing the hospital was that it had the only lunch counter in the business district. So not only did they lose health services and jobs, but they lost any place to sit down and eat a simple meal. I love corner markets, community cafes and even the new restaurant, but I think they will still be a food desert. If a little white lie helps to move things along so be it.

God help anybody who tries to do anything in Braddock if this is the response it gets. And god damn anyone who dares make a profit in doing so. But thank that god we have Pierce to martyr himself for our sins of trying to economically improve the community.

You're right ALMKLM, how dare I question somebody coming into a neighborhood, presenting that neighborhood in a certain light to get money, and who's claiming he'll do something he hasn't achieved in any of his other restaurants I guess just because somebody is throwing money around I should shut up and let them do whatever, because they obviously are doing what's in the best interest of the neighborhood and the current residents. All development = progress, right? As usual, bringing up any concerns = anti-progress. I mean heck, I must really hate the community to not be fawning all over this fantastic opportunity

Pierce, how many residents of Braddock are against this? I mean, there's obviously at least a few who are for it (Fetterman, Sousa, etc.); how many people do you know, who live there, who are actively opposed to this development?

Pierce wrote:What’s wrong with a poor, working class neighborhood? We have to live somewhere and an expensive restaurant isn’t going to help us out, as far as I know

To step way back in the discussion, and to venture even further from anything bike related, there is nothing inherently wrong with a "poor working class neighborhood". In fact as you said, areas like that are necessary and always will be. The problem arises when that "bracket" becomes too large of a percentage of the overall mix for the municipality to support. Vital services can't be paid for, utilities can't be maintained, the physical environment degrades, and the area spirals downward. Braddock. Even at the level of individual properties, it requires a certain minimum income level to keep a roof on a house, keep the siding from falling off, and keep the furnace running. Who knows, the tax bill from this restaurant alone might allow Braddock to hire another police officer or put a down payment on a fire engine, or repair a section of street. What we need to be doing in this country is discussing and rejecting the idiot mythology that by hard work and pulling hard enough on your bootstraps, everyone can be a millionaire. That's just stupidity from a mathematical perspective. Everyone cannot be wealthy. Through hard work, luck, and the WILLING SUPPORT OF THE REST OF SOCIETY, some people will rise and become wealthy. And there will always be people at the other end of the scale through no fault of their own. A healthy society recognizes, requires, and provides for the entire scale of humanity.

edmonds59 wrote:I bet it sure wouldn’t hurt for folks on that side of town to get involved and drop nuggets about how freaking awesome it would be to connect to the GAP through Braddock and the Rankin Bridge.

Bill, there's a few of us advocating the "Braddock Connector", which connects the SVT's Whitaker Flyover Bridge to the Rankin Bridge. It's pretty neat. I'll pass the Trafford aspect along.

I understood that the Carrie hot metal bridge would at some point become fitted for ped / bike traffic. That would allow for these traffics to be completely separate from cars. And let's not forget that Duck Hollow connector.

AtLeastMyKidsLoveMe wrote:God help anybody who tries to do anything in Braddock if this is the response it gets. And god damn anyone who dares make a profit in doing so. But thank that god we have Pierce to martyr himself for our sins of trying to economically improve the community.

Well said. I had a look at that town and it is in shambles. Goodness. It amazes me anyone would be against a restaurant opening to at least provide some employment and a little life. Strange.

I love the rankin bridge connector idea. The trick is getting people on to the sidewalks on that bridge, there is no easy way. The damn sidewalks just end on the homestead side and put you between two lanes of traffic with no marked crosswalks. Terrible design.

reddan wrote:Pierce, how many residents of Braddock are against this?

Probably one. lol

The P-G has a somewhat related article today. http://www.post-gazette.com/local/region/2014/01/09/Majority-of-poor-are-young-in-suburbs/stories/201401090219 Of note is the finding that transportation has a significant impact on people's economic opportinities.

I don't know if Pierce is close to alone in his hostility to this restaurant or to increasing development. Maybe, maybe not. Everyone has different preferences and that's fine. But you can't take a poll of your neighbors and ask what they really want and then have that magically appear. Businesses want to make money, and that might be serving locals, or that might be serving folks from nearby but wealthier areas they can't afford to get the space in. And the absence of business is a collosal problem. See edmonds comment about public infrastructure, etc., etc. And as for what is the people's preference, again, I haven't polled current residents, but the population graph Marko had earlier in the thread bears re-posting: You can come up with graphs showing major population decline from industrial heyday on a lot of Pittsburgh neighborhoods, but this one isn't just bad. It's REALLY, REEEEEAAALY bad and continued after such factors would explain it. To me this suggests at minimum that a lot fewer people like the way it is now than liked the way it was. I'd hazard that some folks who stuck also would prefer it that way, or at least a little more so! Also see edmonds comment about needing an economic base for public services etc. You don't have that with everyone working class or poor and especially don't have that when you couple with the shockingly drastic population decline. Starting from such a tenuous point, someone coming in with cash to bring something new and different to the community (with the potential to bring in more cash, improve the image of an area, and possibly employ some locals) sounds pretty freaking awesome. Pierce, would your opinion be different if he served some vegan items? Would like to put this to bed now.

gg wrote:

reddan wrote:Pierce, how many residents of Braddock are against this?

Probably one. lol

No, Pierce lives in North Braddock. My question was serious: is there any community opposition, offsetting the community support? As Pierce said earlier:

Pierce wrote:

To me, the important question is, how does the neighborhood want to “come back?” The neighborhood didn’t go anywhere. People have been living there all along. People still live there. What do you want a neighborhood to look like? What does the neighborhood want to look like?

I'd say that is a far more important consideration; and I'd say it's a question whose answer thus far points to support for the venture by the neighborhood.

As an aside, I think there is great value in questioning things commonly taken at face value (like "all progress is good", "greater motor traffic throughput is good", "economic development is good", "bike lanes are good"), so long as one's position doesn't become an irrational hill to die on. I'm glad that Pierce and others raise such questions; healthy discussion requires differing points of view, held by people who don't treat changing one's mind as a sign of weakness or failure.

@reddan++ and, BTW, the most likely outcome from this is that the restaurant opens and closes in a year or two; next is that it manages to stay open after the excitement dies down, doing a moderate but not outstanding business indefinitely. It would be really incredible if it led to the complete revitalization / gentrification of Braddock that Pierce fears. Even if things turn around, there are decades worth of housing stock to use up before there is any justification for raising rents. And, Braddock's biggest problem, which is that it is in an isolated corner of the river with no easy access, remains.

As someone who grew up in Clairton it's always a good thing to see a storefront open up vs. being boarded up. This is a positive thing for the community. It's one more building with activity...being fixed up rather then decaying away.

I thought this story was relevant to this thread. http://www.npr.org/2014/01/22/264528139/long-a-dirty-word-gentrification-may-be-losing-its-stigma

I listened to the NPR story on the radio this morning. The bit at the end of the transcript is sweet: " Murry's will be closing, and a Whole Foods will take its place. Foster says he just hopes Whole Foods will put a bench out front.". I have no doubt that the WF will have benches, along with a parking lot in back and the requisite row of of bike stands in front (complete with a bike maintenance station!). I somehow doubt that Foster will be able to afford to shop there. But I would hope that WF hires from the neighborhood.

NPR, home to middle of the road liberals who listen to crap that won't upset them or recognize their own complicity in what's happening around the world, the equivalent of elevator music radio programming Kind of a confirmation bias no? People who didn't move had better credit scores? People in gentrified neighborhoods were more likely to stick around and have better financial health? I'd imagine a neighborhood would already have to have some stability before it was a candidate to be gentrified.

There are lots of studies of this. Here is a review article. Gentrification gets a bad rap for displacing the poor, but the real question is what happens to displaced people -- do they do better or worse? And there doesn't seem to be a lot of evidence that poor people lives are made worse by gentrification. In any case, as I said before, Kevin Sousa would be hitting it out of the park for his restaurant to gentrify Braddock. It has so very, very far to go.

Recent NPR take on gentrification -- http://www.popville.com/2014/01/npr-studies-are-now-showing-that-gentrifying-neighborhoods-may-be-a-boon-to-longtime-residents-as-well/ http://www.wbur.org/npr/264528139/long-a-dirty-word-gentrification-may-be-losing-its-stigma http://www.npr.org/2014/01/22/264528139/long-a-dirty-word-gentrification-may-be-losing-its-stigma

Pierce wrote:NPR, home to middle of the road liberals who listen to crap that won’t upset them or recognize their own complicity in what’s happening around the world,

wow. I mean, is it pledge week or something?

@v++ BTW for about one third of the country NPR is an extreme left-wing socialist propaganda machine associated with baby murder and that anti-Christ, Obama. It warms my heart to hear someone criticize it from the left.

Pierce wrote:I’d imagine a neighborhood would already have to have some stability before it was a candidate to be gentrified.

Most neighborhoods are somewhat stable. They might be mostly boarded up, but that is stable enough I guess. Not sure why you are against a business opening. This guy seems to have a good reputation. Maybe someone could get a job there and walk to work. Maybe it will save a storefront for at least for a while. The mayor that was elected is for it correct? What is the problem? It isn't like that town will save its buildings without some outside investment. Do you just want most all of it to crumble more and more? I guess it is okay if it did. It isn't hurting anyone I suppose. I think the people in the neighborhood could protest it if they don't want it. They have the mayor's ear I suspect. Not sure why you are so against a restaurant opening there? Most people would be happy just to save one building in the business district and maybe have a job. I agree it is an odd place to open up what seems to be a higher end place, but I am not invested, so it isn't for me to say. Buildings are for sale or for rent in all kinds of areas. That place is zoned for a restaurant. Someone is going for it. It really isn't anyone's business unless you live in that neighborhood and can vote it out or complain about it. It is my understanding you don't live there. I am sure you could gather residents or poll them to hear what they have to say. If they don't want it, maybe you could organize a protest, but it probably wouldn't matter. You can't stop it if it is zoned for it. That is why they do zoning.

Yeah, I don't live there. I live a mile and a half away. I should really mind my own more local affairs @jonawebb I hope a third of the population isn't as stupid as that, but then again, how much traction did all those birthers get? I mean people think Obama is a "socialist," and his only accomplishment is what, penalizing citizens for not purchasing crap from companies? (ACA) And letting all white collar criminals off the hook with company tax-deductible fines? And trying to negotiate a free trade agreement (without Congress) for 40% of the global economy even after the disastrous results of NAFTA? etc, etc, etc Moving the center towards the right has been a great tactic at keeping the status quo I also wish the anti-choice people would criticize Obama for all the children his drones and other foreign policies have caused, but I guess those lives aren't as important

Never said you should mind your more local affairs. Just wondering why you are so against a business opening. As far as Obama. I think people are living in fantasy land to think presidents have much power. Big corporate interest runs the place and there is nothing anyone can do about it. Just look at what happened to President Carter when he butted heads with big oil. You are probably too young to remember odd and even gas days, but there was a sudden fuel shortage. Fuel = energy which controls the economy. This was the last time a president messed with big oil and that is just one example. Would you like me to discuss one of the biggest ponzi schemes ever? The bank/real estate BS that the taxpayers had to pick up the tab for? Oh and what about the fear/pentagon Military Industrial Complex we have been living that started with JFK when he tripled military spending as soon as he got in office? These days with how small the world got, we pretty much are at the mercy of the big cartels. Banks, oil (energy) and the list goes on. Think of the diamond industry with DeBeers controlling everything (prices/supply). Talk about a joke! Obama can't get anything done. Heck he can't even lift the embargo on Cuba for goodness sake. He is a total disappointment, but I don't think anyone will be better. We need to massively cut military spending and build infrastructure, but we won't due to the government wanting us to live in fear. Okay, back to this little restaurant that seems to be an earth shattering event.

Timely: Fetterman voiced his opinion on a lot of these issues over at Reddit.

Very interesting, mostly civilized, conversation going on in here! I have to agree that having genuine concerns & conversations about how a business might affect/gentrify a community are important to have, however some of the negative comments brought-up in here seemed ---at least to me--- slightly on the malicious side, as-if interjecting some obscure/evil ulterior motives might be behind Kevin Sousa and/or his Team with this new restaurant..... not cool. I'm a big fan of Kevin, both of his food and restaurant entreprises, and must say that his heart is in the right place. Starting with his first restaurant (Salt), down to Pig & Chicken, H & H, even the Union Station -he's always tried to travel the slightly-less traveled path each time to find locations for his restaurants in neighborhood areas that could use some of the synergy he and his clientele brings. Each time he's done it, it brings a degree of danger -opening a restaurant, and a successful one at that, is not an easy task, for it can make you or brake you if it fails, and for him to go to Braddock would be his biggest risk to-date which many -or rather none, usually do. Sure, having the restaurant is also a potential risk to Braddock as well (gentrification and what-not); but the community is depressed enough that experimenting with this endeavor should fit it nicely to in the least inspire others to give Braddock a chance to open other community-sustaining businesses to strengthen its feeble current economy. And please note -by writing this I'm not implying that what is currently happening in Braddock is bad or not important, only that it needs more. I look forward to see the new restaurant open and see how it fares, and hope that it will inspire others to invest in it. And last but not least, gentrification is not started or caused by one business alone -there are alot of factors at play when it unfortunately occurs. Ok, that's it....

On the Reddit AMA, did you notice the oblique mention of the GAP connector?

BTW, Mayor Fetterman was featured on a show, A day in the life and is available for free on hulu if anyone wants to check it out. http://www.hulu.com/watch/358111

Nice video. Wishing him and the community the greatest success. I think they have a good caring mayor with his heart in the right place.

If there was any malice, it was more due to my hyperbolic writing style rather than an actual feeling on my part Even though the mayor says that gentrification isn't possible because there's such a population decline, (per the Reddit post) I still don't think that's entirely impossible. It's true that there are a lot of vacant properties, but a lot of them are in such disrepair that the repair costs are equivalent to buying a property in the same area without the problems. For example, there are two houses across an empty lot from me. Both are vacant. They both have holes in their roofs and major water damage. The cost to repair the roof alone would be equivalent to buying another house in the neighborhood. Even just tearing them down would almost be as cheap as buying another house in the neighborhood. That's how low house prices are out in the depopulated burbs. I read on some other Braddock site that there isn't even any commercial properties on Braddock Ave that are tenant ready. They're building a new commercial property on the street. I'm not sure what's going in there, but I'm dubious So anyhow, I think the building stock and lack of population is being overstated

Pierce wrote:Even though the mayor says that gentrification isn’t possible because there’s such a population decline, (per the Reddit post) I still don’t think that’s entirely impossible.

I've traveled through Braddock quite a bit over the last 15 years. From what I've seen there are major impediments to what I'd call "true" gentrification, i.e., middle class people and above moving in and pushing out the poor. First, there is the local income tax rate of (I believe) 4.07%. That is a direct consequence of what happens when, as Edmonds rightly noted, the percentage of the poor becomes too high for the municipality to support - a pattern that is plain to see in the county's poorest boroughs. 4.07% amounts to a lot of money for a couple that brings in between 100k and 200k per year in gross income by getting out of bed and going to work every day. It's also a lot for people who have to retire, pay their student loans, pay to raise their kids, etc. on their own money. If I recall correctly, the real estate tax is equally staggering. The bottom line: it isn't a great place to have a high income or own a valuable piece of real estate. Second, I don't recall seeing any of the larger, well-built homes that are good candidates for rehabilitation and investment. Many areas of Pittsburgh have that sort of housing stock and in my view would be a much safer investment than trying to rehab a small, dilapidated place in Braddock. Third, as a few commenters noted above, there simply isn't much happening there. So, not unlike a number of comparable neighborhoods, to live there you get a whole lot of the downside that comes with a run down neighborhood - the high taxes, the blight, the risky real estate investment - but you don't get a lot, if any, of the upside of an urban environment, e.g., being able to walk to a nice park, a well-stocked grocery store, a nice choice of bars and restaurants, multiple entertainment venues, etc. Fourth, the place probably has the same issues that Homewood and other run down neighborhoods have: a glut of properties that are very difficult to acquire and rehabilitate due to massive tax liens, owners who can't be located, and other "clouds" on the title to real estate. There was a great article on the problem in the P-G just two days ago. I've seen the problem firsthand, having tried to acquire a piece of property from someone who was happy to sell, provided that I cleaned up the past-due real estate taxes. I quickly found out that the owner never paid dollar one of real estate taxes since acquiring the property 20 odd years ago, and the liens were 15x what I felt was fair market value! None of this is to knock the place or diminish what the mayor et al. are trying to do. I just can't help but note the serious barriers to true gentrification by truly affluent people. @Pierce, I honestly think you are scapegoating gentrification and garden variety neighborhood revitalization efforts with a separate issue: the region's shortage of decent, affordable housing for people with low incomes. There was an article in the P-G a few months ago about that topic, and it would be worth your time to find and read it. The lack of low income housing is a multifaceted issue, and gentrification is probably among the least significant causes, at least in our region. Among the more substantial causes are the closing of public housing projects, negative attitudes toward Section 8 housing, zoning laws that reflect said attitudes, property that is beyond its useful life, property that has been run into the ground for any number of reasons, even the high scrap price of copper, which drives junkies to break into homes and rip out the plumbing and wiring for its scrap value, rendering a marginal home beyond economic repair. Those are all more substantial causes of the problem than some entrepreneur opening a mid-priced restaurant in an old car dealership.

" Those are all more substantial causes of the problem than some entrepreneur opening a mid-priced restaurant in an old car dealership." Valid point taken. FWIW, this organization is doing okay work in this arena: http://www.actionhousing.org/ I'm on the fence whether it is better or worse for poor people to own property, but my hunch is that for long-term poor people, owning property is ultimately better than renting for a similar period of time. For a lot of people, property is largest asset they have and more so for poor and minority people. Those same groups were also disproportionately effected by the housing collapse and all the house financing hoopla. Even with Action Housing though, poor people are still renting so their own labor is just going down the drain. Similarly, I'm seeing an increasing trend of senior housing in these low income neighborhoods. My hunch is that whereas before an elders money may have stayed in the family, now the money is going into these nonprofits, reducing already low generational wealth

Pierce wrote:Even with Action Housing though, poor people are still renting so their own labor is just going down the drain.

Perce, do you know true cost of house ownership? Interest rate is a small portion of this. Real estate taxes, insurance, continuous repair (roof every 10-25 years, painting walls, fixing stuff outside and inside, appliances, gas-electrical lines-water lines-sewage insurance), all utilities, cutting grass and tools for this, all permits, etc. And if something is broken very often it has to be fixed very soon or it's going to cost you many times more. so you have to have money saved for these "unforeseen cases". And biggest part of those spending's are not going to be reflected in a house price since (other than inflation) since it's your duty to maintain property in normal condition (otherwise bank can sue you). After owning house for 13 years I am thinking that probably apartments are could be a choice for me. I doubt that majority of poor people understand it.

Does anyone know the status of Mr. Sousa's endeavor in Braddock? I drove by there last week and from the outside it looked like nothing has happened in a long time. Can anyone with current knowledge comment on this?

I have asked and received no response. It's a good question, especially as his business partner is running for the Senate.

Last I heard, and I believe this was a couple of months ago, it's still coming... From what I remember, and maybe this is already known, the building required more extensive renovations than was originally thought. (ADA requirements came into play, causing other issues.) From the outside, in the last few months, more work has been done on the sidewalk/parking lot/curb with concrete being poured and stuff. They've sealed up the inside pretty well, so I presume they're working on stuff inside there too. Article from October: http://www.thepointofpittsburgh.com/a-visit-with-kevin-sousa-and-the-game-changing-superior-motors/ Opening date scheduled for April 26th. Not sure to what extent Fetterman is a "business partner" other than helping securing funding for some of the community aspects of the project with Braddock Redux, which is a local Braddock org that does community stuff.

Last I heard, and I believe this was a couple of months ago, it's still coming... From what I remember, and maybe this is already known, the building required more extensive renovations than was originally thought. (ADA requirements came into play, causing other issues.) From the outside, in the last few months, more work has been done on the sidewalk/parking lot/curb with concrete being poured and stuff. They've sealed up the inside pretty well, so I presume they're working on stuff inside there too. Article from October: http://www.thepointofpittsburgh.com/a-visit-with-kevin-sousa-and-the-game-changing-superior-motors/ Opening date scheduled for April 26th. Not sure to what extent Fetterman is a "business partner" other than helping securing funding for some of the community aspects of the project with Braddock Redux, which is a local Braddock org that does community stuff. Edit: Also a good blrub from Sousa from March last year, mentioned in the previous article: http://sousapgh.com/2015/03/01/the-whole-story/ FWIW, since my initial ranting, I've somewhat mellowed, met Sousa in person, and follow him on social media. He seems like a decent guy. As an budding entrepreneur on a much smaller scale and dealing with much smaller sums of money, I can empathize. Things take time, especially when you're working with loaned money and government entities.

I like Sousa, too. FWIW Mr. Fetterman owns the building (or perhaps more accurately, his family owns the building that the Kickstarter money is removating) and his residence takes up the upper floor.

Some reporting on progress: http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/12/21/braddock-stalled-restaurant-project-update

I drove past this place yesterday and saw that construction was in progress. Does anyone have any updated information about the project's status? I was amazed to read, in the article linked above, that 700k has been spent on the project so far, and from the street it looks to be far from ready to do business. And it apparently hasn't priced the working poor and the underclass out of Braddock, as some had worried about earlier in the thread.

Oh yes. I'm on the mailing list. Early Summmer, for real! Store front is installed, exterior finishes in the works. Local artist Mia Tarducci providing us with this stunning 10' x 4' painting. Working on new dishes. Culinary training curriculum getting locked in.

Sousa announced today that Superior Motors will open in July: https://www.facebook.com/kevin.sousa.718/posts/556319441424470

Says two weeks now: http://www.nextpittsburgh.com/eatdrink/kevin-sousas-long-awaited-superior-motors-cusp-grand-opening/ I've got my free dinner Kickstarter benefits ready.