[Minivan Werner]

Glad they're still pursuing the elevated park over the Crosstown. Very cool idea.

[hyperion1110]

Sounds like a great plan! I will support any ideas that try and reconnect the urban fabric in this area. Hopefully this will continue spreading east towards oakland.

And, I don't think they are building a bridge; It sounds like metal panels and tiles to the existing sidewalk area. I'm not sure.

It really does sound like a good plan.

I can't quite get an image of how this thing is supposed to work. If this is an extension of the walkway, how could there be trees and gardens? Maybe I'm just being dense, but I expected them to literally cover 579, reconnecting Downtown and the Hill in a meaningful way.

Whatever they do, it'll be an improvement!

[Minivan Werner]

There's an artist's rendering of it in the first post..

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e235/UrbaniDesDev/1222psite-a.jpg

Basically like an elevated park.

[qwho]

There's an artist's rendering of it in the first post..

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e235/UrbaniDesDev/1222psite-a.jpg

Basically like an elevated park.

What is right behind the arena? :shrug:

[DBR96A]

What is right behind the arena? :shrug:

A parking garage! :tup:

[tooluther]

The casino

[EventHorizon]

Yeah, that's the old IOC rendering - and that's the casino behind the arena.

[hyperion1110]

Yeah, that's the old IOC rendering - and that's the casino behind the arena.

So, even though Isle of Capri didn't get the license, is the picture of the new park-like thing accurate? Cause I really don't think $1.5 million is going to get you something that nice.

[EventHorizon]

So, even though Isle of Capri didn't get the license, is the picture of the new park-like thing accurate? Cause I really don't think $1.5 million is going to get you something that nice.

Well, I haven't seen any updated renderings for that proposal - so I'm not sure if we should look at that picture as being an accurate representation of what they now have planned or not. ??

[chucka]

The $1.5 million is only for the walkway on the side of the arena (between the new arena and church).
The covered highway will probably cost $15 million based on the amount the politicians are raising for the projects.

From the CDCP (http://www.cdcp.org/home.htm) e-newsletter:

Walter Hood Awarded Public Art Project at New Arena

Acclaimed landscape architect Walter J. Hood - the April 20 speaker at the CDCP's Design Excellence Lecture Series - designed the award-winning submission for the Garden Passage pedestrian walkway at the new Consol Energy Center. Walter Hood's design for the $1.5 million project was one of 28 submitted for review to the Sports & Exhibition Authority selection committee. His vision, "Curtain Call," is 15-feet tall stainless steel curtains embedded with thousands of photographs inspired by August Wilson's ten Pittsburgh Cycle plays, according to a recent story in the Pittsburgh Tribune Review. Ferns, ash trees, dogwoods, and other vegetation also will be planted along the pathway. As he stated to the audience at the recent Design Excellence Lecture Series, civic engagement is important to Walter Hood's design process; he will be working with Hill District neighbors and others to select
the pictures for the steel panels.


Trib article (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_624184.html) with more info on the walkway

[Evergrey]

This is much more than a place to get mind-blowingly delicious frites... this is a major development that will transform Highland Park's surprisingly pathetic business district

http://www.popcitymedia.com/developmentnews/parkbruges0520.aspx

Point Brugge Café owners to open Highland Park bistro

http://www.popcitymedia.com/galleries/Default/Dev%20News/Issue%20159/pointbruges_ELDI_300.jpg

By early next year, Highland Park will have its own version of Point Breeze staple Point Brugge Café.

Park Bruges Café, as it will be called, is part of the redevelopment effort of the neighborhood’s business corridor. On Friday, the Highland Park Community Development Corporation and East Liberty Development Inc. hosted a groundbreaking for the first phase of the Bryant Street Revitalization Project, which includes the Park Bruges project. The next phase features 12 two-story townhomes built around a center courtyard, and 3,400 square feet of commercial retail space.

Park Bruges will occupy the first floor of an existing building on the corner of Bryant and N. St. Clair Sts., not far from coffeehouse Tazza D'Oro and Italian restaurant Joseph Tambellini. Two residential rental units will be created above Park Bruges, and one nearby vacant house will be demolished to make room for a first-floor addition. Design work for the $2.5 million project was provided by East Liberty-based Moss Architects, and Repal Construction Co., Inc. will serve as the general contractor.

Park Bruges will feature a similar menu and ambiance to Point Brugge. The bistro will be seat up to 65, and will include a small patio for al fresco dining.

“Highland Park is the kind of neighborhood we want to be in,” says restaurant co-owner Jesse Seager. “It’s a close-knit community with a great combination of new, young families and people who have been here for decades. It’s eclectic and creative, and that demographic works for us.”

To receive Pop City free every week, click here.

Writer: Caralyn Green
Sources: Jesse Seager, Point Brugge Café, Park Bruges Café; Ernie Hogan, deputy director, East Liberty Development, Inc.

Image courtesy East Liberty Development, Inc.

[edncc1701d]

Big developer backs off and "small town" wins... ha... maybe these whiners will get what they asked for... the traffic and ugly tall high rises built on the Greentree side without any financial development going to the city

hopefully the developer, although not creating the most riveting projects, hasn't left town for good.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/breaking/s_626196.html

Developer withdraws rezoning request for controversial plan

By Jeremy Boren
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Thursday, May 21, 2009


The developer behind a controversial plan to build a 418-unit residential complex on Pittsburgh's border with Green Tree has withdrawn its request for a critical zoning change on the city side.

Irving Firman, an attorney representing Florida-based SouthStar Development Partners, submitted a letter today to City Council withdrawing the company's application to rezone 10 of the site's 26 acres.

City Council had been scheduled to take a final vote on the application today, a week after voting preliminarily to reject it. The council is expected to table the matter indefinitely.

Firman's letter did not provide a reason for withdrawing the request. Residents of Ridgemont, the city neighborhood in which part of the project would have been built, lobbied council members to reject rezoning the land, a former golf driving range. Neighbors said the complex would ruin their quiet neighborhood and add more traffic to busy Greentree Road.

About 240 units in the development could still be built in Green Tree because the borough's council has already approved the needed zoning change.

[Evergrey]

I didn't realize this Mt. Washington complex was going to include a retail component as well... this development sounds awesome! But I fear this too will go the way of Chicken hill and Don Allen once the NIMBYs break city council down ... Theresa Smith might be in favor of it... but I doubt she'll be able to overcome Kraus and Peduto :haha:

http://www.pittsburghcitypaper.ws/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A63615

Eating Park?

BY CHRIS YOUNG

From the porch of her Mount Washington home, Jacqueline White's view of Pittsburgh's Downtown skyline is slightly obscured by some treetops along the Grandview Scenic Byway Park. But for her, that's part of the appeal. She and her neighbors "appreciate looking out on the green space just as much as we appreciate looking at the city," she says.

White is worried, though, that a threat to the park and its wildlife is lurking just over the horizon.

A Chicago developer, Steven Beemsterboer, plans to build an $80 million hotel-condo complex at the site of Mount Washington's long-abandoned Edge Restaurant, which broods over the hillside near the Monongahela Incline. If built, the facility will feature roughly 140 hotel rooms and 60 condominiums, as well as stores, restaurants and an underground parking garage.

But while the majority of the development, called One Grandview Avenue, will occupy land the developer has purchased over the past few years, part of it could stretch into the Byway Park. On May 5, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported that the developer's plan would require the city to surrender a sliver of the 268-acre public park.

"That would be sinful," says Laurie Lajeunesse, who lives near White, on East Sycamore Street. The city designated Mount Washington's steeply sloped hillside as a park in 2006, and Lajeunesse says, "I specifically moved here because I can see wildlife and the city all at the same time."

Beemsterboer's lawyer, Kevin McKeegan, says such concerns are premature. The P-G story, he contends, was based on preliminary plans. He cautions that the developer is still unsure whether the project will even need to take up any of the nearby parkland. And even if it does, McKeegan says the P-G's report that the developer plans to engage in a land swap isn't certain yet, either. According to the P-G, Beemsterboer would trade a piece of private land next to East Sycamore Street for a piece of the public park.

McKeegan would not provide land-use plans to City Paper because they "are still somewhat in a state of flux," he says.

According to McKeegan, the development would require roughly five acres of land. Drawings of the complex, created by Pittsburgh architecture firm Desmone & Associates, suggest the complex would resemble descending stairs, rising highest on the west end and sloping downward, toward the P.J. McArdle Roadway.

If the project does require any park land, says McKeegan, the developer will most likely need just a quarter of an acre. Some residents are more willing than others to make that concession.

Chris Beichner, executive director of the Mount Washington Community Development Corporation, praises the developer for meeting frequently with the community. The group's board and members have unanimously voted in favor of the project three times in the past eight months, Beichner adds.

"The community is in overwhelming support of the development," he says. "It's going to bring jobs." What's more, says Beichner, "I believe it would enhance the park" -- because the developer has discussed plans to add trails and walkways.

Board member Anne Holmes, for one, can't wait to see the unsightly Edge Restaurant replaced. The building has sat vacant for roughly 30 years, and the site "looks like Sarajevo," she says. "It needs to go."

Beemsterboer "only needs a sliver of the park," Holmes continues. But some residents "don't want to give it to him. ... It's turned into a personal vendetta between the [residents] who want the park and the ones who don't."

"Is caring about the environment a bad thing?" White counters. "I would be embarrassed if I wasn't protecting that park."

"We have to preserve our parklands," agrees Lajeunesse.

Lajeunesse is particularly upset with neighbors who seem willing to downplay environmental concerns because only a small amount of parkland is at stake. Even if the parcel is small, she says, handing it over will set a bad precedent. "Who's to say they won't take parkland from other parts of the city?" she asks.

Selling the parkland would require the approval of city council, but council typically defers to the councilor representing the affected area. And Mount Washington's current council representative, Theresa Smith, supports the development.

"I do care about the environment," says Smith. "However, I think it's a good project."

[MattofSloppyVariety]

I wish they would cap that whole section there, not just the one part

[Evergrey]

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_626311.html

Polish Hill revitalizing itself through investment, community activity

By Jodi Weigand
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, May 22, 2009

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/photos/2009-05-21/0522polish-a.jpg
Polish Hill is bordered by the Strip District, Lawrenceville, North Oakland, the Upper Hill District and Bedford Dwellings.
Philip G. Pavely/Tribune-Review

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/photos/2009-05-21/0522polish2-a.jpg
Polish Hill resident Lou Castelli moved there eight years ago.
Philip G. Pavely/Tribune-Review

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/photos/2009-05-21/0522polish3-a.jpg
A ghost sign in Polish Hill was revealed after after a fire destroyed a neighboring structure.
Philip G. Pavely/Tribune-Review



Terry Doloughty is hoping an influx of residents and businesses in Polish Hill will help the neighborhood shed its status as "a shortcut to somewhere else."

"My dream would be to walk up to Brereton (Street) and have to put my name on a list to sit and eat at a restaurant," said Doloughty, 43, president of the Polish Hill Civic Association.

A secondhand shop, coffee shop, record store and comic book store are expected to open by summer's end, Doloughty said. And more people are moving to the neighborhood — particularly young working adults seeking an affordable place to live in the city, he said.

"Things were stagnant, and now we have a lot of residents that are seeing potential (in the community)," he said.

In the past year, the city's Urban Redevelopment Authority invested about $350,000 to rehabilitate seven homes and 4,800 square feet of office space, Joanna Doven, spokeswoman for Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, wrote in an e-mail.

There were 832 residential and 60 business addresses in Polish Hill at the end of March, according to the latest data available from the U.S. Postal Service and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. That's up from 774 residential and 53 business addresses at the same time last year, data show.

Among seven new businesses are the four opening this summer; a deli that reopened on Brereton Street; and two other Brereton storefronts under renovation, Doloughty said. It's unclear whether businesses are moving into those storefronts.

That's impressive growth for a small neighborhood, said Ann Dugan, executive director of the University of Pittsburgh's Institute for Entrepreneurial Excellence, a branch of the Katz Graduate School of Business that offers guidance and resources for regional businesses.

"What it tells me is that it's a neighborhood that's being revitalized," she said. "It shows you there is strength."

Polish Hill's location — touching popular neighborhoods such as Strip District and Lawrenceville — makes it a good spot to start a business, Dugan said.

"People are looking to stay local, to buy from people they know and trust," she said.

Paulette Still-Khouri, 41, believes so. In June, she plans to open Urban Gypsy on Brereton Street, where she will sell recycled and repurposed goods.

"There were no businesses except for bars, so you had to leave here to get anything else you wanted," Still-Khouri said. "I always thought, 'Wouldn't it be great to have something here and bring something new and fresh into the neighborhood?' "

Anna Misiaszek of Baldwin reopened Alfred's Deli, which sells Polish and American deli items, on Brereton last fall. She closed shop two years ago, after 15 years in business, because she was attacked in the neighborhood, she said. After operating the deli in Lawrenceville for two years, she decided to move back to Polish Hill.

"It's nice to have somewhere to walk and get bread and milk," said Leah Durand, 31.

Lou Castelli, 44, who moved to Polish Hill eight years ago, said he believes growth will help sustain the neighborhood for years.

"I've always thought it's a neighborhood that will always be vital because there's such a great mix of people," he said.

Jodi Weigand can be reached at jweigand@tribweb.com or 412-380-5609.




Polish Hill

Location: Bordered by the Strip District, Lawrenceville, North Oakland, the Upper Hill District and Bedford Dwellings.

Landmark building: Immaculate Heart of Mary Roman Catholic Church, founded in 1897 and modeled after St. Peter's Basilica in Rome

Neighborhood notes: Once called Herron Hill. By 1895, the large number of Polish immigrants who moved there renamed it.

You might not know: Polish Hill has a blog — the Blogski, accessible at blogski.phcapgh.org.

Sources: Polish Hill Civic Association and the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh

The big empty

Despite Polish Hill's recent growth, vacant buildings spot the neighborhood.

"The task is when we try to bring in new residents, it takes a certain breed of person to undertake the renovations," said Terry Doloughty, president of Polish Hill Civic Association. "Both financially and willpower-wise, it takes a lot to dig into."

Of 940 residential addresses, 108 were vacant — about 11.5 percent — as of March 31, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and Postal Service data. There were seven vacant storefronts.

By comparison, Stanton Heights had 32 vacant residential addresses out of 889, about 3.5 percent.

The city is working to clean up an abandoned property at the corner of Dobson Street and Herron Avenue in Polish Hill to create a community garden, Joanna Doven, spokeswoman for Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, wrote in an e-mail.

A vacant lot on Dobson, where a March 2008 fire destroyed two apartment buildings, is being considered for a community bread oven, Doloughty said. The bread oven would be outdoors and look like a brick stove with a pit for building a fire and a shelf for placing bread pans.

"When the (buildings) came down, there was a ghost sign — and it was for Mother's Bread," Doloughty said, referring to a former bakery in an adjacent building. The sign, painted on the side of the building, wasn't visible until the apartments were razed. "We had an area where there was destruction by fire, and then we find this, and now we (are) rebuilding by fire."

— Jodi Weigand

[Evergrey]

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09142/971937-53.stm

Chicken Hill complex request rescinded

Friday, May 22, 2009
By Diana Nelson Jones, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

SouthStar Development yesterday rescinded its request before City Council to have 10 acres in Ridgemont rezoned for a housing complex adjacent to Parkway Center Mall.

Residents of Ridgemont, also known as Chicken Hill, have fought the plan since it was proposed last summer. City Vista at Parkway was to have included 10 acres in Pittsburgh and 16 in Green Tree for a 400-plus community of townhouses and condos, 178 of which would have been in the city.

Green Tree approved the plan last year.

Opposition in Ridgemont prolonged the public hearing process through the spring. It resonated with City Council, which, in a preliminary vote last week, voted against the zoning change.

"Rather than force council to choose sides, we want to go back and work with the community to come up with a plan that's a win-win for everybody," said Irving Firman, the developer's attorney. "We're confident we will be able to come up with something that makes sense because the project makes sense."

He said the developer believes City Vista would "springboard the region into more development" and bring Parkway Center Mall back to life.

The next step is "to start over," bringing the Chicken Hill Caucus to the discussion, he said. The neighborhood group did not exist when SouthStar drew up its plans.

Beth Hanis, a Ridgemont resident who founded the caucus, said the neighbors "have been trying to reach solutions with them since July. From day one, they never listened to us. We asked about parks and access roads" and got neither. She said she doesn't think there's any plan the neighborhood would sign off on.

"We made a list of pros and cons, and there was not one thing on the pro list among the neighbors. I don't know how many more meetings we want to sit through just because they want us to jump through hoops. We don't want to waste any more time."

Diana Nelson Jones can be reached at djones@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1626. Also visit her blog at http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/citywalkabout.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09142/971937-53.stm#ixzz0GDC1sRH5&B




...



http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09142/971888-53.stm

School board considers sales agreements for buildings

Friday, May 22, 2009
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The city school board may take another step Wednesday toward selling the former Connelley and Letsche school buildings in the Lower Hill District.

The board will vote on negotiating a sales agreement with Pittsburgh Gateways Corp., which has proposed turning the buildings into a center for green innovation. Education would be part of the center's mission, so it's possible the Pittsburgh Public Schools would continue to maintain a presence in the buildings.

The board also will vote Wednesday on selling the former Washington Polytechnic school building in Lawrenceville for $200,000. The prospective buyer, Nemo Investments Capital, has proposed converting the building into a hotel.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09142/971888-53.stm#ixzz0GDD355Ln&B



...



http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/business/s_626300.html

Soffer Organization eyes apartment building, garage in South Side

By staff and wire reports Friday, May 22, 2009

Soffer Organization is planning 130 new apartments and a new 760-car parking garage, at its $300 million SouthSide Works, South Side.

"Both the apartments and garage are currently in design and should be started this year," said R. Damian Soffer, president and chief executive officer. There are 84 apartment units on the site, all of them occupied with a waiting list, Soffer said.

The garage, the fifth to be located there, will be built by the Pittsburgh Urban Redevelopment Authority, which owns the four other garages.

[JackStraw]

I actually never been through Polish Hill till this year. The only time I ever heard of it was in that stupid Bruce Willis movie "Striking Distance". I think it is a awesome neighborhood. It has potential of being "cool". It is far from rundown, and far from looking abandoned. Just blah, it needs something, and I hope the best for it.

[Evergrey]

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/business/s_626476.html

Foreclosure sought on Union Trust Building

By Joe Napsha, TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Saturday, May 23, 2009

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/photos/2009-05-22/0523btrust-a.jpg
Executives of Los Angeles-based Mika Realty Group, owners of the building, are “not in breach of anything,” an attorney says.
Steven Adams/Tribune-Review file photo

A California bank that wants to foreclose on the historic Union Trust Building in Downtown claims the owner defaulted on a $34.5 million mortgage because about $3.6 million in mechanics liens have been filed against the property.

California National Bank of Long Beach claimed in mortgage foreclosure documents filed in Allegheny County Court in Pittsburgh last week that Union Trust's owner, executives of Los Angeles-based Mika Realty Group, was required to pay bills to prevent the filing of mechanics liens, or give the bank 150 percent of the contested amounts.

The bank, which said it still is owed $25.8 million on the mortgage, has a hearing set for Aug. 5 on its request to Allegheny County Court to appoint a receiver in the case.

Christopher Reeder, a Los Angeles attorney representing the ownership group, said Friday that Mika Realty will fight the lawsuit. "The company is not in breach of anything," he said.

Contractors have not been paid because California National Bank underfunded the loan by $10 million, Reeder said. Mika Realty will file suit to force the bank to provide funding to pay the contractors that did the work, he added.

Cohen & Grigsby P.C., a Downtown law firm representing California National Bank, declined to comment.

Ten Pittsburgh-area contractors that worked on renovations to the Union Trust Building in 2008 and this year filed liens in Allegheny County Court against the property and ownership group, claiming they are owed a total of $3.57 million. The liens were filed beginning in January and extended into this month.

The largest of those liens, $1.46 million, was filed by Star Electric Co. of Sharpsburg. A spokesman could not be reached for comment.

Mika Realty, whose executives formed 501 Grant Street Partners LLC to buy the Union Trust Building, has disputed the contractors' claims, according to documents filed in the case. 501 Grant Street Partners bought the office building for $24.1 million in February 2008.

Rick Barreca, chief executive of Mika Realty, could not be reached for comment.

C.B. Richard Ellis Inc., a commercial real estate agency whose Pittsburgh office was a leasing agent for the Union Trust Building, was named as a defendant in two of the mechanics liens. Jeffrey Ackerman, an executive vice president of the CB Richard Ellis investment properties group, could not be reached for comment.

One tenant in the building, Siemens Power Generation Inc. of Orlando, leases 185,000 square feet on four floors of the building with about 700 employees. It was named as a co-defendant in Star Electric's lawsuit. A Siemens spokesman could not be reached.

The 11-story building, constructed in 1916 for industrialist Henry Clay Frick, underwent extensive renovation last year and work continued into this year. The building, occupied by the former Mellon Financial Corp. until 2006, has about 600,000 square feet of leasable space.

California National Bank said it learned that the cost to complete the renovations "substantially exceed the approved budget." The ownership group did not give the bank sufficient money to cover the costs, as required by its mortgage, according to the documents.

The unfinished renovations in and around the building, including the closing of one sidewalk and the partial closing of another, "was one of the reasons we decided to relocate," said Tom Michael, president of Larrimor's, a men's clothing store that has been at the Union Trust Building for 70 years."The difficulties we've had with the ownership (of the building)," played a role in the move, he added.

Michael, who intends to move the store to the One PNC Building at Fifth Avenue and Wood Street in February, said it has been hard to maintain business through the construction that began last year. "It's been very difficult and it has clearly impacted us," Michael said.

The bank's attempt to have the court appoint a receiver in the case to oversee the property is becoming a more common practice, "particularly in the current (economic) environment," said Margaret M. Good, president of the Meridian Group, a Downtown-based investment banking and turnaround consulting firm.

The receiver typically is a person the bank has confidence to oversee the property and work with the tenants. In some cases, the bank may be more likely to provide financial support to the receiver to remedy a situation with the property, rather than the owner, Good said.

[dugdogmaster]

I actually never been through Polish Hill till this year. The only time I ever heard of it was in that stupid Bruce Willis movie "Striking Distance". I think it is a awesome neighborhood. It has potential of being "cool". It is far from rundown, and far from looking abandoned. Just blah, it needs something, and I hope the best for it.

Check out Gooski's Pub, cool little dive bar.

[JackStraw]

Check out Gooski's Pub, cool little dive bar.

Sounds like an "odd" name for Polish Hill.:haha:

[ctoocheck]

Soffer Organization is planning 130 new apartments and a new 760-car parking garage

How many bloody parking garages does the SSW need?! Anybody know how filled the four existing ones ever get?

[bradjl2009]

How many bloody parking garages does the SSW need?! Anybody how filled the four existing ones ever get?
Maybe it's for the residents of all those new apartments. IMO I think the SSW should try retail again and focus more on store that people do use often such as a grocery store, electronics store, a cheaper clothes store, etc.

[Evergrey]

How many bloody parking garages does the SSW need?!

I agree... I'm sure there's all sorts of facts and figures about parking thresholds necessary to get anything built... but it does seem a bit ridiculous that SSW is like 75% parking garages... and another one is coming along.

[Gilamonster]

As I was sitting here watching the Cavs-Magic NBA game, I again was thinking of something that occasionally runs through my mind. Perhaps this will initiate some interesting discussion as well. The issue I was pondering is to what degree are Pittsburgh and Cleveland related to each others success/failure. Are we economic competitors or rivals? Is what's good for one bad for the other, or should we consider the two cities more of a related area and consequently consider that what is good for one is positive for the other. My personal opinion is that our economies are not tremendously connected but as a very anti-Cleveland sports fan, I would grudgingly say that the cities have more of a symbiotic relationship than a competitive one. Also, perhaps thats part of the problem with the 2 cities; we don't think regionally. I can't help but think of San Diego and Los Angeles since I lived out there for a while. Those cities are 2 hours apart as well but function almost like 1 region. I know there are quite a few factors that make this comparison somewhat unrealistic but the point is that there are other regions of the country where people think that way and not just southern California. I would venture to say that one of the biggest differences between here and there is mindset. The fact that the highway system out there is incredible and that a significant number of citizens out there were born elsewhere doesn't hurt. Anyways, I am curious as to what everybody else on here thinks about the Pittsburgh/Cleveland relationship.

[koolkid]

anyone have any photos of the small commercial buildings on Liberty that were demolished to make way for the August Wilson Center? Several of the buildings were in extremely poor condition... some were vacant or housed things like adult bookstores and strip clubs... the owner of Tonic owned the Liberty Tavern across the street... two buildings were torn down in 2002 and the rest came tumbling down a few years later as the city finally acquired all the properties

here's an interesting article on this process from 2002:

http://www.post-gazette.com/neigh_city/20020815liberty5.asp

This was the best i could find:
http://i41.tinypic.com/14altmr.jpg
from flickr by elston

I made sure it was the right spot of the currently under construction awc through google street view:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=978+Liberty+Ave,+Pittsburgh,+Allegheny,+Pennsylvania+15222&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=38.638819,79.101563&ie=UTF8&cd=2&geocode=FfodaQId91o7-w&split=0&t=k&lci=com.panoramio.all&layer=c&cbll=40.443402,-79.996181&panoid=adEJNytDRtxzH6UaXb23hA&cbp=12,100.76,,1,3.1&ll=40.442669,-79.995317&spn=0.00908,0.019312&z=16&iwloc=A

Looks like the small street is long gone aswell.

[DBR96A]

As I was sitting here watching the Cavs-Magic NBA game, I again was thinking of something that occasionally runs through my mind. Perhaps this will initiate some interesting discussion as well. The issue I was pondering is to what degree are Pittsburgh and Cleveland related to each others success/failure. Are we economic competitors or rivals? Is what's good for one bad for the other, or should we consider the two cities more of a related area and consequently consider that what is good for one is positive for the other. My personal opinion is that our economies are not tremendously connected but as a very anti-Cleveland sports fan, I would grudgingly say that the cities have more of a symbiotic relationship than a competitive one. Also, perhaps thats part of the problem with the 2 cities; we don't think regionally. I can't help but think of San Diego and Los Angeles since I lived out there for a while. Those cities are 2 hours apart as well but function almost like 1 region. I know there are quite a few factors that make this comparison somewhat unrealistic but the point is that there are other regions of the country where people think that way and not just southern California. I would venture to say that one of the biggest differences between here and there is mindset. The fact that the highway system out there is incredible and that a significant number of citizens out there were born elsewhere doesn't hurt. Anyways, I am curious as to what everybody else on here thinks about the Pittsburgh/Cleveland relationship.

Honestly, I think Cincinnati is more our "twin" than Cleveland is. Cleveland is quickly becoming another Detroit. There's also a lot of lament in northeastern Ohio that Youngstown seems to be gravitating more toward Pittsburgh than Cleveland in recent years. Expect the counties in extreme eastern Ohio to develop more of a relationship with western Pennsylvania than with the Cuyahoga Valley cities in the future.

[Johnland]

This was the best i could find:
http://i41.tinypic.com/14altmr.jpg
from flickr by elston

I made sure it was the right spot of the currently under construction awc through google street view:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=978+Liberty+Ave,+Pittsburgh,+Allegheny,+Pennsylvania+15222&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=38.638819,79.101563&ie=UTF8&cd=2&geocode=FfodaQId91o7-w&split=0&t=k&lci=com.panoramio.all&layer=c&cbll=40.443402,-79.996181&panoid=adEJNytDRtxzH6UaXb23hA&cbp=12,100.76,,1,3.1&ll=40.442669,-79.995317&spn=0.00908,0.019312&z=16&iwloc=A

Looks like the small street is long gone aswell.

Well actually, those buildings had alot of merit. Worn and torn - yes, but they were the same calibre as the classic 19th century commercial buildings lining the other side of Liberty which are perfectly fine. To me, Pittsburgh lost valuable building stock to make way for the musuem. Again, it comes back to if the economy were stronger, and there were more commercial building owners making enough money to properly renovate and maintain, they could've been saved.

[ctoocheck]

I'm sure there's all sorts of facts and figures about parking thresholds necessary to get anything built

I don't know about facts and figures....probably just zoning code. Most parking lots (at least in suburban areas) are required to be able to hold all absolute maximum ever needed (on Black Friday) while the rest of the year the lots of half empty. I hope that is not the case in the City, especially in the unique SSW development.

But seriously, I don't get it. If the existing lots are usually mostly not full (this is the sense I get); they are not building tons more apartments or retail, or expect tons more people to be attracted to the SSW soon I just don't get it. It's not like this is the North Shore where you have heavy event traffic to plan for. Nor is this a central site where the garages could serve a greater portion of the Southside. PLUS they should be encouraging transit use instead (I guess they are kind of ignoring that anyway by widening E Carson and turning it over to more traffic). I mean, if they think that the types of stores in the SSW attract suburbanites who drive (I've heard this), there is still not a problem getting parking if the four existing lots are never full.
Whatever. I guess I just don't understand. Seems like the URA is wasting money on this as possibly degrading the urbanity of this area, n'at.

[MattofSloppyVariety]

you also have to remember that one of those garages is there for the use of American Eagle Outfitters, and only AEO. The other two, from what i know, leases many spaces to the stores and businesses located down there. I know of a few stores that give their managers electronic passes to park in the garages year round. So it's safe to assume that this new parking garage would probably be exclusively just for residents. Although i'm sure people will still attempt to park in them even though the gate doesn't go up.

[edncc1701d]

Maybe it's for the residents of all those new apartments. IMO I think the SSW should try retail again and focus more on store that people do use often such as a grocery store, electronics store, a cheaper clothes store, etc.

I agree. I've said something along these lines before. Just think what a store like Trade Joe's or even Whole Foods would do for the South Side Works. They need to focus less on upscale retail. They should look at what the East Side people are doing.

Perhaps once the recession has run its course, the South Side Works will have a solid retail base upon which it can return to placing more upscale retailers.

[Tombstoner]

Honestly, I think Cincinnati is more our "twin" than Cleveland is. Cleveland is quickly becoming another Detroit. There's also a lot of lament in northeastern Ohio that Youngstown seems to be gravitating more toward Pittsburgh than Cleveland in recent years. Expect the counties in extreme eastern Ohio to develop more of a relationship with western Pennsylvania than with the Cuyahoga Valley cities in the future.

I'm not so sure. Cleveland has a world-class medical complex and university (Case Western). Neither Detroit or Cincinnati do. Cleveland also has great cultural institutions that most American cities its size cannot match (its art museum is better than the Carnegie and its symphony is at least as good as Pittsbugh's). Cincinnati has many nice attributes, and a more solid business community, but it is really not cutting edge in any respect I can think of (and I don't mean to slam Cincinnati). Cleveland has some real problems, but I think it is a worthy adversary (though it lacks Pittsburgh intrinsic loveability). :)

[pj3000]

This was the best i could find:
http://i41.tinypic.com/14altmr.jpg

I liked that block of buildings on Liberty. Though it was gritty and seedy, that part of downtown Pittsburgh was cool. It had a NYC Hell's Kitchen feel to it. The August Wilson center is a great asset for downtown and the growing "cultutral district", but I would have liked it in a different location with a better design... the edge of the Hill District (his birthplace and a highly-influential center for African-American culture) along with the new arena/developments to tie the Hill back into downtown, or maybe along with the city's other cultural institutions in Oakland (where he edcated himself).

[ColDayMan]

I'm not so sure. Cleveland has a world-class medical complex and university (Case Western). Neither Detroit or Cincinnati do. Cleveland also has great cultural institutions that most American cities its size cannot match (its art museum is better than the Carnegie and its symphony is at least as good as Pittsbugh's). Cincinnati has many nice attributes, and a more solid business community, but it is really not cutting edge in any respect I can think of (and I don't mean to slam Cincinnati). Cleveland has some real problems, but I think it is a worthy adversary (though it lacks Pittsburgh intrinsic loveability). :)

Cleveland has the best symphony in the world, outside of Wein. But aside from that, Cincinnati AND Detroit BOTH have world-class museums (Cincinnati's CAC was rated in the top contemporary art museums in the world; the Cincy Pops is rated one of the top in the country; blah blah); Detroit's Art Museum is legendary, the Ford Hospital one of the top in the country, etc. And NO city (Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, or Pittsburgh) in this region are "cutting any sort of edges" anytime soon, aside from small little local attributes that any of the four can claim. I agree with DBR96A that Cincinnati is more of a Pittsburgh-twin than Cleveland is, though Cleveland has the steel/blue-collar/Eastern Euro thing Pittsburgh has so perhaps that's where a comparison can be drawn in.

[Black-n-Gold]

How many bloody parking garages does the SSW need?! Anybody know how filled the four existing ones ever get?

Actually, Soffer has prepared extensive studies and projections to reduce the amount of parking at SSW significantly below the amount required by the zoning code. They've also timed the construction of the garages to avoid building anything until it is needed.

They've basically modeled parking demand throughout an entire typical day / week to try and capture how many spaces are needed at any one time so that as office workers leave their spaces can then be used by people going to shop or restaurants. Because of this, the peak parking demand / use is not on black Friday like it would be at the mall, but instead on a Thursday or Friday night when all of the office workers haven't left yet and the restaurants / stores are starting to fill up.

The model used to project all of this is occasionally updated based on actual use of the garages built so far. You may not want to see any more parking at SSW, but Soffer really doesn't want to pay for any more parking there, so they're probably even more motivated than you are!

[themaguffin]

I think culturally Northeast Ohio is certainly more Pittsburgh than Southwest (or any other Ohio region).

It terms of the obvious topography compactness, and a few other traits, Cincy has more in common with Pittsburgh (at least with industry more or less gone from Pgh in the traditional sense).

I would agree in terms of cultural institutions they all offer some high (or very high) quality options.

Something that I think is great for Pgh though is the Warhol, as it's something other than the typical big city musuem and is just fascinating. I don't even think most people knew what a nice amenity that was going to be for the city before it opened (or even after) and while it's difficult to call the oldest "North American exhibition of contemporary art from around the globe" cutting edge, it's also very nice for Pgh to be home of the Carnegie International.

[ColDayMan]

I'd perhaps say Pittsburgh city and immediate suburbs are more Northeast Ohio yet surrounding Pittsburgh area (I suppose Western Pennsylvania?) is more Southeast Ohio in nature. But I definately agree with your post.

[Evergrey]

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09146/972697-53.stm

Landscaped 'cap' sought over I-579 near arena

Tuesday, May 26, 2009
By Jon Schmitz, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Officials are hoping that a $20 million overpass can bridge the economic gap between Downtown Pittsburgh and the chronically depressed Hill District.

Four lawmakers this month requested federal funding to build a landscaped "cap" over Interstate 579 just west of Mellon Arena, with walking and biking paths.

It would fill in the block bounded by Bedford and Centre avenues, Washington Place and Chatham Square.

U.S. Sen. Bob Casey and U.S. Reps. Mike Doyle, Jason Altmire and Tim Murphy have requested a total of $9 million for planning and design of the cap and construction of a curving, landscaped walkway next to the new arena, one block away.

Supporters say the cap would have economic and environmental benefits.

"In addition to the temporary construction jobs the project will create, finally connecting Downtown Pittsburgh ... will assist in the success of other development projects in the Lower Hill neighborhood, including residential, commercial and institutional developments," said a statement submitted with the grant request.

"The bridge will create a new urban green space. The green space will mitigate 'heat island effect.' Elevated temperatures from urban 'heat islands' can affect a community's environment and quality of life causing increased energy consumption, elevated emissions of air pollutants and greenhouse gases, and impaired water quality," it said.

Construction of I-579, also known as the Crosstown Expressway, "essentially decapitated the Lower Hill neighborhood from the rest of the city," the funding request said. "Mobility between the two was either unsafe or eliminated."

"Pedestrians and bicyclists are forced to either travel a great distance around several blocks to negotiate a path into [or out of] Downtown or risk a very narrow and dangerous curb on an existing overpass across I-579," Mr. Doyle, D-Forest Hills, said in the request sent to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Backers are hoping to get earmarks for the project in the new federal surface transportation authorization bill, currently being written by the committee.

The walkway at the new arena is estimated to cost $1.5 million and would link plazas on Centre and Fifth avenues along the western rim of the building.

Named "Curtain Call," the 300-foot path would have what its creator, Hood Design, calls a "quilted curtain skin" -- four curved stainless steel structures that would be the framework for a mosaic of up to 27,000 tiles bearing images and photographs of people and places in the Hill District.

In keeping with the "green building" concept promoted for the arena, the walkway will have trees and gardens that are sustained by four vegetated basins that capture and filter rain water, according to a preliminary design report.

The new arena, Consol Energy Center, is scheduled to open for the 2010-11 National Hockey League season.
Jon Schmitz can be reached at jschmitz@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1868.

Read more: "Landscaped 'cap' sought over I-579 near arena" - http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09146/972697-53.stm#ixzz0GclIDRB6&A

[Evergrey]

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_626701.html

Garden Theatre plot still lies fallow

By Jeremy Boren
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Tuesday, May 26, 2009

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/photos/2009-05-25/0526pgarden-a.jpg
When the URA in February 2007 purchased the Garden Theatre, which was being used as an X-rated cinema, visions of a restored upscale movie house were bandied about. Artist Dan Wintermantel was commissioned for a blocklong project on North Avenue, which included murals decorating the buildings that include the former Garden. Two years later, the building still sits empty, and a poor roof has damaged much of the interior.
Philip G. Pavely/Tribune-Review file



A decade-long fight to transform the former Garden Theatre from a porn parlor into a movie house or performance hall is mired in yet another intermission with no clear end in sight.

The Urban Redevelopment Authority purchased the X-rated cinema for $1.1 million in February 2007 after the owner agreed to end a court challenge that stalled attempts to clear dilapidated buildings from the section of North Avenue between the Mexican War Streets and Allegheny General Hospital in the North Side.

"There's no way of using that space now. When they shut it down almost 2 1/2 years ago, it was in bad shape, and now it's worse," said Aaron Stubna, owner of Lincoln Barber Shop in Bellevue, who has floated one idea for redeveloping the building. "When you don't use a building like that for a long time, it deteriorates."

Holes in the roof allowed rain water to soak into the theater's ceilings and walls, until the URA agreed to pay up to $60,000 to install a temporary roof this month. An architect familiar with the building said it's likely no longer safe to use for performances.

The hard-fought acquisition of the 94-year-old theater was cause for celebration.

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl threw a "garden party" in July 2007 to mark the opening of Quantum Theater's "The Collected Works of Billy the Kid," the first performance there in which most of the performers remained clothed since the theater started showing porn in the 1970s.

The Garden's stage has been dark ever since. Its future is just as murky.

Stubna proposed remaking the space into a one-screen movie house where visitors could linger before and after films to enjoy drinks at a wine bar and live music in a lounge.

"It was great to perform in," said Karla Boos, Quantum's founder and executive director. "It exists as a place for people to experience something already. Why not keep it as that? It is historic, and it is part of our community."

Despite the lapse since buying it, there are signs of progress, said Mark Fatla, executive director of the Northside Leadership Conference.

"From my perspective having done this for 20-some years, this is actually moving quickly. I know the impression in the community may not be that way," Fatla said.

The conference has teamed with the Central Northside Neighborhood Conference to hold public "master planning" sessions to gather neighbors' ideas for redeveloping the Garden and surrounding block.

The next one is scheduled for 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. June 13. The location hasn't been decided.

Fatla said rushing to reopen the Garden as a theater pub, cinema, restaurant, brew house or some combination of all four would be a mistake, particularly given the difficult economy. He said there's consensus the Garden and neighboring buildings must become businesses that draw customers from the region, not just the North Side.

"You can't just operate on wishes. You have to put it in the context of what the market will support," he said.

The nearby market is beginning to show its potential.

People are buying townhouses under construction on Federal Street; a Carnegie Library is being built to replace one damaged by lightning in 2006 in Allegheny Square; and Aiello Development Co. and JRA Development Group are trying to crystallize $3.6 million in financing to bring a mix of retail, restaurant and residential uses to six URA-owned parcels near the Garden.

In March, the URA granted the development team a six-month extension on exclusive rights to develop the block.

"There's a lot of frustration for sure that these wonderful buildings are sitting and decaying, but I think things are moving in a positive direction," said Greg George, an architect with Rob Pfaffman + Associates PC, which has been hired to help guide the master planning process.

"I think we'll have something exciting we'll be announcing within a year," he said.

Jeremy Boren can be reached at jboren@tribweb.com or 412-765-2312.

[pj3000]

^ Thanks for the I-579 park/cap update, Evergrey. I really want to see this built. Connecting downtown with the rest of the city is vital.

[Johnland]

Lately, there has been so much in the news about states raising income taxes and how that actually can drive out high-income, productive residents. It also is clear that Pennsylvania is surrounded by these high-tax state - NY, NJ, Maryland and Ohio. I think PA should aggressively lower or abolish its income tax in an effort to attract those fleeing the other states. Could lead to some population and development growth.

[JackStraw]

Lately, there has been so much in the news about states raising income taxes and how that actually can drive out high-income, productive residents. It also is clear that Pennsylvania is surrounded by these high-tax state - NY, NJ, Maryland and Ohio. I think PA should aggressively lower or abolish its income tax in an effort to attract those fleeing the other states. Could lead to some population and development growth.

Yes, it leads to population and development growth for sure. In N.E. and S.E. Pennsylvania which has an abundance of never ending "bedroom communities"! AKA, shitty boxy sprawly developments names "Country Farm Estates" and so forth throughout the state.

We need to figure out how to fix our tax structure such as extremely high property tax within our major cities. We already are getting enough fleeing transplants with cheaper living offset by their 2 hour drive to work to Baltimore, Washington, or N.Y.:rolleyes:

Pennsylvania sees this "growth" in the S.E. and the N.E. part of the state as productive. It may increase our population, and our tax base, but does it half hazardly by hurting our state more than it helps it.

[Johnland]

Yes, it leads to population and development growth for sure. In N.E. and S.E. Pennsylvania which has an abundance of never ending "bedroom communities"! AKA, shitty boxy sprawly developments names "Country Farm Estates" and so forth throughout the state.

We need to figure out how to fix our tax structure such as extremely high property tax within our major cities. We already are getting enough fleeing transplants with cheaper living offset by their 2 hour drive to work to Baltimore, Washington, or N.Y.:rolleyes:

Pennsylvania sees this "growth" in the S.E. and the N.E. part of the state as productive. It may increase our population, and our tax base, but does it half hazardly by hurting our state more than it helps it.

Yes, we need more growth generally, but 'smart' growth specifically. You're right about pointing out the undesirable consequences of bedroom communities that are low density and ruin the countryside. It is deplorable that Pittsburgh, a declining population metro, still is consuming countryside for suburban development. I just read statistics that show Pittsburgh and Philly add new development at a fraction of the population density of Phoenix or Fresno. Those areas are forced by dry terrain to only add development within reach of the existing water infrastructure, so they develop density and intensly. Pittsburgh apparantly values open land so cheaply that housing developments leap frog further and further out.

My point was that existing urban areas need more growth and development to pep up their economies. I would love to see Pittsburgh growing, even just modestly, to keep retail and residential activities in the city moving upward.

[themaguffin]

I don't trust sprawl numbers in that regard. Very few metros have a composition like Pittsburgh's where many many communities existed pre post war burb boom and existed because of their own industrial reasons.

Industry died and now some (or many) commute to opportunities elsewhere.

Yes Pittsburgh has its fair share of modern sprawl, but the existing fragmanted communities distort the true nature of the region.

[bradjl2009]

I don't trust sprawl numbers in that regard. Very few metros have a composition like Pittsburgh's where many many communities existed pre post war burb boom and existed because of their own industrial reasons.

Industry died and now some (or many) commute to opportunities elsewhere.

Yes Pittsburgh has its fair share of modern sprawl, but the existing fragmanted communities distort the true nature of the region.

I agree, some of the land being consumed here is sometimes more or less around other developments and not even that far from the city. I just wish our city could build high again. :skyscraper:

[pj3000]

Yes Pittsburgh has its fair share of modern sprawl, but the existing fragmanted communities distort the true nature of the region.

The long-existing fragmented communities ARE the true nature of the region. Sprawl filled in the gaps starting in the 50s, but modern sprawl that has further (and in many ways, more detrimentally) choked Pittsburgh's core has characterized the region's "growth" in recent history.

[PA Pride]

Where does sprawl begin and old established towns end? I consider myself to live in a suburb of Pittsburgh - Hopewell Twp. However all the houses on my street are 85 yrs old, so does that mean i am in a legitimate neighborhood or a sprawly bedroom community? It's not black and white.

[JackStraw]

Where does sprawl begin and old established towns end? I consider myself to live in a suburb of Pittsburgh - Hopewell Twp. However all the houses on my street are 85 yrs old, so does that mean i am in a legitimate neighborhood or a sprawly bedroom community? It's not black and white.

Well thats what TheMaguffin was saying. There are so many areas in Pittsburgh (mostley along the rivers) that are not sprawl. They are old industrial cities that are not really even suburbs. When towns like New Ken, Alliquippa were formed, they were not dependent on Pittsburgh as a city. Not many other metros have as many non-sprawl towns outside the actual city. There are a lot of old small towns that were incorporated into a sea of small. (Like that Olde Town Arvada thread by Ragerunner in the city photos section not long ago).

I consider sprawl to be 1950s or later suburbs dependent on the city their suburb is formed around. Plum, Monroeville, Cranberry, and so many more. Not Alliquippa.

Also, sorry people. As I don't want to beat a dead horse and turn this into yet another couple pages about sprawl. I was initially trying to describe that people are using Pennslyvania to take advantage of lower taxes in other parts of the state, and this is what happens. PA cities need to get a creative group of people and reshape our tax structure.

[hyperion1110]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The way to fix most of the tax/sprawl/suburban McMansion problem is to alter the tax code so that people pay income tax based on where they work, not on where they live. It still boggles my mind that all of the people who make 100K+ working in Downtown Pittsburgh pay there wage taxes to places like Marshall Twp and Cranberry. The work is in the city, so let the city benefit from it. It absolutely infuriates me that so many suburbanites, who work in the city, look down on it because its finances are messed up. Well, I wonder why?! City transforms itself, its economy, and adds thousands of new, high paying jobs all the time. But it's all meaningless because most of the taxes for those jobs go to f&%$tards from out in ass-nowhere! :hell:

I know it will never happen, but this is what I want to see. The city should be allowed to levy a 2% wage tax for those who work but do not live in the city (on top of what they pay to McMansion Country Oaks Farm Township). If you work and live here, you pay less, like 1% total. In a very short amount of time, you'll fix the population and revenue problems for the city.

[qwho]

The city should be allowed to levy a 2% wage tax for those who work but do not live in the city (on top of what they pay to McMansion Country Oaks Farm Township). If you work and live here, you pay less, like 1% total. In a very short amount of time, you'll fix the population and revenue problems for the city.

:tup:

This is something I thought about as well... Is there some reason this wouldn't work? Has this been done anywhere before?

[PA Pride]

:tup:

This is something I thought about as well... Is there some reason this wouldn't work? Has this been done anywhere before?

Well, I believe someone was saying that Philly had tried a higher city wage tax and now many people point to that as one of the main reasons that employers started increasingly setting up shop outside the city.

[Black-n-Gold]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The way to fix most of the tax/sprawl/suburban McMansion problem is to alter the tax code so that people pay income tax based on where they work, not on where they live. It still boggles my mind that all of the people who make 100K+ working in Downtown Pittsburgh pay there wage taxes to places like Marshall Twp and Cranberry. The work is in the city, so let the city benefit from it. It absolutely infuriates me that so many suburbanites, who work in the city, look down on it because its finances are messed up. Well, I wonder why?! City transforms itself, its economy, and adds thousands of new, high paying jobs all the time. But it's all meaningless because most of the taxes for those jobs go to f&%$tards from out in ass-nowhere! :hell:

I know it will never happen, but this is what I want to see. The city should be allowed to levy a 2% wage tax for those who work but do not live in the city (on top of what they pay to McMansion Country Oaks Farm Township). If you work and live here, you pay less, like 1% total. In a very short amount of time, you'll fix the population and revenue problems for the city.

If they pay taxes to the city, then they should have a vote in city elections - otherwise it would be taxation without representation!!

Seriously though, that plan would be the absolute quickest way to turn the Golden Triangle into a ghost town! Of the 30 +/- people in the downtown office where I work, over half live in Mt. Lebanon. If your tax plan went into effect I'm almost certain we'd just move the office to Mt. Lebanon, or I'd go to work for a different architect in Mt. Lebanon (along with 1/2 the office). There's nothing special about having the office in downtown other than its a nice place to work, and a great old building. Our clients are around the region / country, so there isn't a particular need to be in town.

Now a substantial gas tax on the other hand...

[pj3000]

Consolidation anyone?

[Evergrey]

Consolidation anyone?

DOA

There are many peculiarities about Pennsylvania's system of municipal governance that make any prospect of merger or consolidation or that half-assed Nordenberg hybrid essentially impossible. Getting 130 municipal governments on board and yielding all or part of their autonomy depending on consolidation style is impossible. More likely... a consolidation directive for Allegheny County's municipalities would have to come from above... from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania... acting in what it would view as the best interests for future economic and demographic growth for Pennsylvania... but considering the utter uselessness of Pennsylvania's state government... and the myopic revolt that would surely erupt from the local municipalities... that is impossible. My preferred solution would be for a statewide municipal reorganization, such as what the Canadian provinces did recently, that would dramatically reduce the number of municipal governments (and school districts and other authorities). Pennsylvania's hyper-fragmented system of local governance is an anachronism and a serious impediment to sustainable growth. The economic and population hyper-sorting engendered by this bewildering patchwork of a hierarchy of municipalities (cities, boroughs, townships) has contributed greatly to the out-of-control sprawl and urban decline in this most slow-growing of states in recent decades.

[themaguffin]

I would think that many areas of Allegheny county could separately merge.

For example, clusters of 3 to several communities could merge to save on duplicated costs etc and that - while still challenging, would be smaller and more viable and also more real to residents to accept and see the benefit.
I still think it's not close to what is most sound or needed, but still much much better than 130 governments.

I bet the most stable and wealthy burbs would be the most stubborn, but I also think that clusters of the Mon Valley might find it useful.

It's depressing though, even cutting the number in half is still way too many governments.

[hyperion1110]

If they pay taxes to the city, then they should have a vote in city elections - otherwise it would be taxation without representation!!

Seriously though, that plan would be the absolute quickest way to turn the Golden Triangle into a ghost town! Of the 30 +/- people in the downtown office where I work, over half live in Mt. Lebanon. If your tax plan went into effect I'm almost certain we'd just move the office to Mt. Lebanon, or I'd go to work for a different architect in Mt. Lebanon (along with 1/2 the office). There's nothing special about having the office in downtown other than its a nice place to work, and a great old building. Our clients are around the region / country, so there isn't a particular need to be in town.

Now a substantial gas tax on the other hand...

I get what you're saying, but I don't think it would be quite that easy to uproot so many businesses because of a tax. Sure, a lot of folks from the 'burbs would be ticked off. But, I assure you, the major employers, and, I would submit, most employers, would not be compelled to move their location because of a tax. PNC, US Steel, Allegheny Technologies, and all of the rest would not budge because of this. Moreover, and more importantly, the major city industries are necessarily bound to the city. Hospitals cannot move (and all off the major hospitals are in the city), the University of Pittsburgh is not going to move to Cranberry in a huff, and so on. The most likely outcome, in the beginning, would be that some people might quit their jobs in the city. That just means that the employers will look for new hires. And if suburbanites are going to be that dumb about it, employers will just hire from outside the region (darn!), and those people, seeing the tax structure, will just move into the city from the start.

Right now, the city is not really getting much from all of its high-paying jobs. That is the real travesty! Moreover, the tax structurs as it is now has created all of these municipalities that are basically just collections of houses; nothing is really made there, so they become parasitic communities.

For sustained prosperity, an economy must create something consumable, be it intellectual or material. The current tax system rewards leechers and punishes producers, as those communities that produce nothing gain at the expense of the producer. Ideally, then, if we maintain an income tax in the long run, it must be paid to the community that produces the consumable, from whence derives the income that is taxed. Otherwise, there is no impetus to change the current order; we will continue to build "communities" with no economic center.

The "good life" should follow from producing a thing, then reaping the profits, not vice versa. Too many suburban communities are tax havens anymore.

[PA Pride]

Cool video of the under construction August Wilson center:
http://post-gazette.com/multimedia/?videoid=101927&cmpid=mmpanel2

[Evergrey]

I get what you're saying, but I don't think it would be quite that easy to uproot so many businesses because of a tax. Sure, a lot of folks from the 'burbs would be ticked off. But, I assure you, the major employers, and, I would submit, most employers, would not be compelled to move their location because of a tax. PNC, US Steel, Allegheny Technologies, and all of the rest would not budge because of this. Moreover, and more importantly, the major city industries are necessarily bound to the city. Hospitals cannot move (and all off the major hospitals are in the city), the University of Pittsburgh is not going to move to Cranberry in a huff, and so on. The most likely outcome, in the beginning, would be that some people might quit their jobs in the city. That just means that the employers will look for new hires. And if suburbanites are going to be that dumb about it, employers will just hire from outside the region (darn!), and those people, seeing the tax structure, will just move into the city from the start.

Right now, the city is not really getting much from all of its high-paying jobs. That is the real travesty! Moreover, the tax structurs as it is now has created all of these municipalities that are basically just collections of houses; nothing is really made there, so they become parasitic communities.

For sustained prosperity, an economy must create something consumable, be it intellectual or material. The current tax system rewards leechers and punishes producers, as those communities that produce nothing gain at the expense of the producer. Ideally, then, if we maintain an income tax in the long run, it must be paid to the community that produces the consumable, from whence derives the income that is taxed. Otherwise, there is no impetus to change the current order; we will continue to build "communities" with no economic center.

The "good life" should follow from producing a thing, then reaping the profits, not vice versa. Too many suburban communities are tax havens anymore.

Bravo. Brilliant post.

The CITY of Pittsburgh has one of the highest job densities in the nation... and it is home to the lion's share of high-paying jobs in the region. It features one of the most dramatic daytime population increases in America... and has two huge employment hubs... the corporate towers of Downtown and the cutting-edge research/higher-education/health care cluster in Oakland. The CITY is unquestionably the economic engine of Southwestern Pennsylvania... yet the municipality where all these jobs are locates does not reap the benefits.

The CITY is so dramatically under-bounded and under-powered... meaning it's almost effortless for a worker to live only a few miles from Downtown yet reside in a suburban municipality... contributing virtually nothing to the CITY where their livelihood is created. This under-bounded CITY, however, houses all these functions in its small area due to the CITY's economic advantages of centralized location and industry cluster density. The CITY is the location where so much of the greater metropolitan region converges on a daily basis for economic, cultural and social activity. The CITY has to support the activity of a couple million people (infrastructure, public services, etc.) while only drawing on the incomes of a tiny sliver of that population... a population that is generally poorer than the greater region. This is why you have this never-ending situation where the city's finances are in dire straits. It doesn't really matter what the mayor or the councilors of the CITY of Pittsburgh do... the roots of the CITY's structural deficit are caused by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The CITY plays by the rules the state sets... from the arbitration process with fire and police that continually strains the budget and spawns apocalyptic pension liabilities (a process currently on pause thanks to the hugely flawed Act 47 Recovery oversight)... to the types of taxes (and limits) it can levy on resident incomes, commuters, businesses, non-profits, etc.

It's a testament to the outstanding quality of the neighborhoods, business districts, amenities, beauty, people, built environment, etc. of the CITY that it has been able to withstand such massive challenges and retain a vibrant economic environment, sustain and revive so many livable and beautiful neighborhoods and attract a growing cohort of highly educated young adults. However, unless the CITY experiences some sort of miracle boom... it will be hard pressed to ever overcome its financial morass and provide optimal services and maintain infrastructure under the status quo municipal governance regime of Pennsylvania. The CITY's arcane horse-and-buggy era boundaries of 55 sq. miles trap it in a bygone era, failing to adjust to shifting socio-economic realities of the global marketplace, and limit its opportunities for growth and development. Containing only 1/4 of the county's population and less than 15% of the metro's population... the CITY is not much more than "just another municipality" in terms of political power in the region... hemmed in by obsolete mill municipalities, isolationist enclaves of wealth and ambitious exurban townships working at cross purposes with the urban core.

[PA Pride]

Bravo. Brilliant post.

The CITY of Pittsburgh has one of the highest job densities in the nation... and it is home to the lion's share of high-paying jobs in the region. It features one of the most dramatic daytime population increases in America... and has two huge employment hubs... the corporate towers of Downtown and the cutting-edge research/higher-education/health care cluster in Oakland. The CITY is unquestionably the economic engine of Southwestern Pennsylvania... yet the municipality where all these jobs are locates does not reap the benefits.

The CITY is so dramatically under-bounded and under-powered... meaning it's almost effortless for a worker to live only a few miles from Downtown yet reside in a suburban municipality... contributing virtually nothing to the CITY where their livelihood is created. This under-bounded CITY, however, houses all these functions in its small area due to the CITY's economic advantages of centralized location and industry cluster density. The CITY is the location where so much of the greater metropolitan region converges on a daily basis for economic, cultural and social activity. The CITY has to support the activity of a couple million people (infrastructure, public services, etc.) while only drawing on the incomes of a tiny sliver of that population... a population that is generally poorer than the greater region. This is why you have this never-ending situation where the city's finances are in dire straits. It doesn't really matter what the mayor or the councilors of the CITY of Pittsburgh do... the roots of the CITY's structural deficit are caused by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The CITY plays by the rules the state sets... from the arbitration process with fire and police that continually strains the budget and spawns apocalyptic pension liabilities (a process currently on pause thanks to the hugely flawed Act 47 Recovery oversight)... to the types of taxes (and limits) it can levy on resident incomes, commuters, businesses, non-profits, etc.

It's a testament to the outstanding quality of the neighborhoods, business districts, amenities, beauty, people, built environment, etc. of the CITY that it has been able to withstand such massive challenges and retain a vibrant economic environment, sustain and revive so many livable and beautiful neighborhoods and attract a growing cohort of highly educated young adults. However, unless the CITY experiences some sort of miracle boom... it will be hard pressed to ever overcome its financial morass and provide optimal services and maintain infrastructure under the status quo municipal governance regime of Pennsylvania. The CITY's arcane horse-and-buggy era boundaries of 55 sq. miles trap it in a bygone era, failing to adjust to shifting socio-economic realities of the global marketplace, and limit its opportunities for growth and development. Containing only 1/4 of the county's population and less than 15% of the metro's population... the CITY is not much more than "just another municipality" in terms of political power in the region... hemmed in by obsolete mill municipalities, isolationist enclaves of wealth and ambitious exurban townships working at cross purposes with the urban core.

Another good post. Thanks for that. It seems clear that we need 1 of 2 things: A substantial increase in city population to help pay more taxes or the state government to perform a huge overhaul on our hyper-fragmented region.

[Evergrey]

The difficulty with increasing the population of the CITY of Pittsburgh is manifold... being located within a metropolitan area of declining population within a quad-state mega-region of declining population perhaps chief among them... Can we become the first ever core city to grow while its surrounding region declines? Or will we have to wait until the entire region finally overcomes its negative population inertia?

additionally, much of the city's famed "50% population shrinkage" can be attributed to the fact that average household size shrunk by about half since Pittsburgh's population peak in 1950... a trend apparent in all advanced societies except perhaps Utah in recent decades (I'm not glossing over the real urban flight and greater regional flight during the steel collapse... but there is a reason the City doesn't feel "50% empty")... with a decline in household size... the City must create opportunities for new households to reside here!

Being locked into a 55 sq. mile area that has essentially been 99.9% built out for 60 years is a major challenge for development and population increase within this municipality. Just look at the few examples of large "new neighborhood" development in recent years... we had to resort to a slaughterhouse island in the Allegheny River and a giant slag heap on the very edge of the city limits. There seems to be demand for new housing with modern amenities in the CITY, but the opportunities to create supply are limited. Denied land for spatial expansion and development, the CITY's opportunities for population growth can only be achieved by revitalizing existing neighborhoods and increasing densities with redevelopment and infill. SouthSide Works represents an example of a large-scale mixed-use development that was able to create a couple hundred new residential units on a former steel mill site (and a couple hundred more if it ever reaches build out). The scuttled Don Allen and Chicken Hill developments represented opportunities for transforming urban voids into sites for hundreds of new city residents.... which is why I get so angry when these rare opportunities are squandered due to a cacophony of mindless NIMBYism. The Strip District and South Side have presented many opportunities for converting obsolete factories, warehouses, churches and schools into residential units. Recovering neighborhoods like East Liberty and the Hill District have replaced thousands of high-rise low-income units with thousands of neighborhood-appropriate mixed-income units... while the total number of residents may not have increased... the tax-paying potential certainly has.


There's a few areas of the city with unique assets that I think haven't met pent-up demand and could truly help the CITY reverse the trend of population decline.

Mt. Washington's Grandview Ave. offers one of the most dramatic urban vistas in the world... yet it has seen extremely little residential development in the past 25 years due to stringent municipal regulations and vociferous NIMBYism.

North Oakland... in particular around Centre and Craig should be an epicenter of high-density residential growth... and indeed there were a couple high-rise residential proposals for that area a couple years ago (which may or may not be on... I haven't heard any updates in a long time). It's remarkable there has been so little residential development in Oakland in recent decades... considering the huge growth of the universities in the area. It is centrally located, full of amenities and would seemingly be an ideal locale for urban professionals.

Moving to the east... the Baum-Centre corridor would be an ideal stretch for high-density residential. There is some older stuff that already exists... but much of the corridor is devoted to automobile-centric uses. However, the disappearance of automobile dealerships and other related businesses along that corridor are opening up more opportunities for development. This corridor is very centrally located within the East End and has easy access to the business districts of Shadyside, Bloomfield and Oakland.

Shadyside and Squirrel Hill are two outstanding neighborhoods that appeal to many. However, there is little room for development in either... and any infill must be sensitive to the existing neighborhood. There has been some new condo development here and there... but barring an unforseen baby boom... these neighborhoods are probably pretty maxed out. However, adjacent areas can accommodate spillover... such as Baum-Centre.

Downtown has increased its population substantially in recent years... but the economic reality of the district limits the opportunity for lower-priced units. Unless a Riverparc type development takes off... there will probably be nothing more than slow, steady growth... re-purposing of obsolete office/commercial buildings... and some small new structures here and there a la 151 First Side and Encore on 7th.

The Strip District represents a rather blank canvas... virtually uninhabited a few years ago.. the Cork Factory has demonstrated the potential of the district. There are many other industrial buildings in the area that can be converted to residential use (such as Otto Milk, currently u/c). Continuing eastward through resurgent Lawrenceville... the Allegheny Riverfront represents a huge long-term opportunity... it is currently an industrial wasteland... the neighborhood doesn't even interact with the riverfront... but the redevelopment of dead industrial sites can substantially increase the population of Lawrenceville.

[Johnland]

Being locked into a 55 sq. mile area that has essentially been 99.9% built out for 60 years is a major challenge for development and population increase within this municipality. Just look at the few examples of large "new neighborhood" development in recent years... we had to resort to a slaughterhouse island in the Allegheny River and a giant slag heap on the very edge of the city limits. There seems to be demand for new housing with modern amenities in the CITY, but the opportunities to create supply are limited. Denied land for spatial expansion and development, the CITY's opportunities for population growth can only be achieved by revitalizing existing neighborhoods and increasing densities with redevelopment and infill. SouthSide Works represents an example of a large-scale mixed-use development that was able to create a couple hundred new residential units on a former steel mill site (and a couple hundred more if it ever reaches build out). The scuttled Don Allen and Chicken Hill developments represented opportunities for transforming urban voids into sites for hundreds of new city residents.... which is why I get so angry when these rare opportunities are squandered due to a cacophony of mindless NIMBYism. The Strip District and South Side have presented many opportunities for converting obsolete factories, warehouses, churches and schools into residential units. Recovering neighborhoods like East Liberty and the Hill District have replaced thousands of high-rise low-income units with thousands of neighborhood-appropriate mixed-income units... while the total number of residents may not have increased... the tax-paying potential certainly has.

North Oakland... in particular around Centre and Craig should be an epicenter of high-density residential growth... and indeed there were a couple high-rise residential proposals for that area a couple years ago (which may or may not be on... I haven't heard any updates in a long time). It's remarkable there has been so little residential development in Oakland in recent decades... considering the huge growth of the universities in the area. It is centrally located, full of amenities and would seemingly be an ideal locale for urban professionals.

Moving to the east... the Baum-Centre corridor would be an ideal stretch for high-density residential. There is some older stuff that already exists... but much of the corridor is devoted to automobile-centric uses. However, the disappearance of automobile dealerships and other related businesses along that corridor are opening up more opportunities for development. This corridor is very centrally located within the East End and has easy access to the business districts of Shadyside, Bloomfield and Oakland.

Downtown has increased its population substantially in recent years... but the economic reality of the district limits the opportunity for lower-priced units. Unless a Riverparc type development takes off... there will probably be nothing more than slow, steady growth... re-purposing of obsolete office/commercial buildings... and some small new structures here and there a la 151 First Side and Encore on 7th.

The Strip District represents a rather blank canvas... virtually uninhabited a few years ago.. the Cork Factory has demonstrated the potential of the district. There are many other industrial buildings in the area that can be converted to residential use (such as Otto Milk, currently u/c). Continuing eastward through resurgent Lawrenceville... the Allegheny Riverfront represents a huge long-term opportunity... it is currently an industrial wasteland... the neighborhood doesn't even interact with the riverfront... but the redevelopment of dead industrial sites can substantially increase the population of Lawrenceville.

I have to agree with you on the point about the rather dismal lack of residential development in North Oakland. It has had apartment buildings for nearly a century now, so the neighborhood has long ago lost its single family housing nature. But yet, we've seen very few new highrises go in there.

Also, you pointed out several of the areas that, if Pittsburgh were actually growing, could accomodate new development (Baum-Centre corridor, Strip District, etc.) Pittsburgh's compact little 55 sq. mi. once held more people than live in Boston today - just over 700,000, I believe. I think the same area could hold that number again.

[Evergrey]

Pittsburgh's compact little 55 sq. mi. once held more people than live in Boston today - just over 700,000, I believe. I think the same area could hold that number again.

I disagree... as I stated in my previous post... the maximum population of 676,000 was during an era of much larger household size. Much of the reduction in population density in the city can be attributed to the fact that households shrunk due to declining fertility rates, an increase in median age and an increase in non-family households. This is why the city isn't awash in residential vacancy (other than a few hard-hit neighborhoods)... people still occupy the houses... just less of them per unit. Even without the steel troubles decades ago... a decline in average household size in a city with static boundaries that are already 99.9% built out will inevitably experience population decline. You mention Boston... a city that is admired for being one of the most successful traditional urban cores in recent decades... but even Boston suffered a steep population decline after its 1950 peak. Boston has grown slightly recently, but is 200,000 below its peak. In order to cram 700,000 people into Pittsburgh's existing area... it would have to transform into San Francisco... which is the second most densely populated city in the U.S. ... and well... that's never gonna happen. There are opportunities for growth within city limits... but those opportunities are limited. The true extent of Urban Pittsburgh extends well beyond the municipal boundaries of the city.

[Johnland]

I disagree... as I stated in my previous post... the maximum population of 676,000 was during an era of much larger household size. Much of the reduction in population density in the city can be attributed to the fact that households shrunk due to declining fertility rates, an increase in median age and an increase in non-family households. This is why the city isn't awash in residential vacancy (other than a few hard-hit neighborhoods)... people still occupy the houses... just less of them per unit. Even without the steel troubles decades ago... a decline in average household size in a city with static boundaries that are already 99.9% built out will inevitably experience population decline. You mention Boston... a city that is admired for being one of the most successful traditional urban cores in recent decades... but even Boston suffered a steep population decline after its 1950 peak. Boston has grown slightly recently, but is 200,000 below its peak. In order to cram 700,000 people into Pittsburgh's existing area... it would have to transform into San Francisco... which is the second most densely populated city in the U.S. ... and well... that's never gonna happen. There are opportunities for growth within city limits... but those opportunities are limited. The true extent of Urban Pittsburgh extends well beyond the municipal boundaries of the city.

In the 1950's when larger household size contributed to higher population density, there were also other factors that helped. Car ownership was lower and people probably lived much closer to work allowing for walking or trolley trips. Food shopping was probably done much more at corner grocerias. Also, neighborhoods had local tailors, butchers, variety stores, etc. The middle class could afford to live right in the city and have conviences.

Today, almost all new housing is always expensive and includes parking garages. People shop at big supermarkets with big parking lots. I still feel it's physically possible to house 700K people in the city, but it would require big shifts in transportation, retail, attitudes toward walking and biking.

[bradjl2009]

I disagree... as I stated in my previous post... the maximum population of 676,000 was during an era of much larger household size. Much of the reduction in population density in the city can be attributed to the fact that households shrunk due to declining fertility rates, an increase in median age and an increase in non-family households. This is why the city isn't awash in residential vacancy (other than a few hard-hit neighborhoods)... people still occupy the houses... just less of them per unit. Even without the steel troubles decades ago... a decline in average household size in a city with static boundaries that are already 99.9% built out will inevitably experience population decline. You mention Boston... a city that is admired for being one of the most successful traditional urban cores in recent decades... but even Boston suffered a steep population decline after its 1950 peak. Boston has grown slightly recently, but is 200,000 below its peak. In order to cram 700,000 people into Pittsburgh's existing area... it would have to transform into San Francisco... which is the second most densely populated city in the U.S. ... and well... that's never gonna happen. There are opportunities for growth within city limits... but those opportunities are limited. The true extent of Urban Pittsburgh extends well beyond the municipal boundaries of the city.

I agree.....up until the 1950's, it wasn't uncommon for 6 people to live in a house now 5 people is usually the maximum in a house. While we have lost half of our population most homes are still occupied (just with 1 to 3 people) and I couldn't imagine or want 650,000 people crammed in Pittsburgh with how people live today.

[Black-n-Gold]

At the same time the number of people per household has been dropping, the location of jobs has also become more widespread. Of the 676,000 +/- jobs in Allegheny County only half (340,000 +/-) are located in the City. That's less than 1/3 of the jobs in the region (1,056,000 +/-).

Look, there's no denying that the City of Pittsburgh has structural fiscal problems, but these have developed over decades and for a variety of reasons. To try and make up for all of this past history with a tax on people who commute to work in Pittsburgh seems misguided. If the basic premise is that traveling into the city for the day is a strain on City resources, then why wouldn't this same logic apply to a student at Point Park or the Art Institute?

I think what is really being overlooked here is the benefit there is to the City of having commuters here. Let's say you're a bigwig commuting from your McMansion in Cranberry to the Heinz Headquarters in PPG. The fist thing you do everyday is park your car at a cost of $280 per month. 37.5% of that is taxes to the City which works out to $1,260 in taxes to the City per year just for parking your car. At lunch you may go eat or shop at a locally owned place on Market Square, helping to keep a Pittsburgh resident employed. Later that day you have a meeting with a supplier who flew into town and is staying in a hotel and rented a car, the extra taxes on both of which go to Allegheny County (remember, this guy lives in Butler County). Finally, all of the people working for Heinz in the PPG building keep it occupied, which keeps the building value high, which results in property tax revenue for Pittsburgh. How much revenue? Well the building (1 PPG) is assessed at $185,000,000 and City (municipal and school) taxes are 24.72 mills for a yearly tax of $4,573,200. Now that's for the whole building, one job is much less. An office worker typically accounts for about 250 sf of space in a building, so in this case there are about 3,845 people working there (at 961,000 total sf) for a total of $1,189 per worker in taxes. So in addition to all of the immeasurable benefits to the City of Mr. Bigwig working in town (support for local business, etc.), he accounts for about $2,450 in tax revenue. That has to be more than it costs the City to have him working there.

[Ditchdigger]

Don't forget about the city's "business privilege tax", which is imposed on gross revenue of businesses in the city. Mr Bigwig commuter might live outside the city, but his business is being taxed inside it...

[Brandon716]

^^^^San Francisco has a higher than average population density, in part, because more people live in similar dwellings. It is so expensive to live in the Bay area, you commonly find people rent out rooms in homes they own or its a coop style living arrangement where homes are split. Its a phenomenon only found bigger in Manhattan I'd imagine.

Chicago, for example, is still a much larger city than San Fran even if its affordable enough for people to own more of their own homes and not have to rent rooms out as often (thus appearing on paper to be 'less dense' than SF, which I don't find is the case in reality).

People on these urban forums seem to get so tied up in population density numbers without looking at the underlying living conditions. I was standing with a forumer in San Francisco during June 2007 looking over the city, amazed that the city could withstand the housing price nonsense. He just kept recalling how two high double income earners can withstand it, yet less than a year later the American economy started to unravel because of the astronomically high housing prices.

We simply need more quality affordable urban housing in this country instead of McMansions and elite condos. (another topic for another day, I know)...

In regards to Pittsburgh, the city simply doesn't have the economic and marketing oomph to ever have about 700k residents again (or at least for the forseeable future). Too many people are obsessed with sunbelt marketing for it to happen anytime soon, but it does have a very strong urban job market.

Despite the fact that 'only' 300k+ jobs are located in the city, that is more on average than most cities in America. A matter of fact, an article I found last year was talking about how urban oriented Pittsburgh's job market is relative to most of America.

Its something to take pride in.

[PA Pride]

At the same time the number of people per household has been dropping, the location of jobs has also become more widespread. Of the 676,000 +/- jobs in Allegheny County only half (340,000 +/-) are located in the City. That's less than 1/3 of the jobs in the region (1,056,000 +/-).

Look, there's no denying that the City of Pittsburgh has structural fiscal problems, but these have developed over decades and for a variety of reasons. To try and make up for all of this past history with a tax on people who commute to work in Pittsburgh seems misguided. If the basic premise is that traveling into the city for the day is a strain on City resources, then why wouldn't this same logic apply to a student at Point Park or the Art Institute?

I think what is really being overlooked here is the benefit there is to the City of having commuters here. Let's say you're a bigwig commuting from your McMansion in Cranberry to the Heinz Headquarters in PPG. The fist thing you do everyday is park your car at a cost of $280 per month. 37.5% of that is taxes to the City which works out to $1,260 in taxes to the City per year just for parking your car. At lunch you may go eat or shop at a locally owned place on Market Square, helping to keep a Pittsburgh resident employed. Later that day you have a meeting with a supplier who flew into town and is staying in a hotel and rented a car, the extra taxes on both of which go to Allegheny County (remember, this guy lives in Butler County). Finally, all of the people working for Heinz in the PPG building keep it occupied, which keeps the building value high, which results in property tax revenue for Pittsburgh. How much revenue? Well the building (1 PPG) is assessed at $185,000,000 and City (municipal and school) taxes are 24.72 mills for a yearly tax of $4,573,200. Now that's for the whole building, one job is much less. An office worker typically accounts for about 250 sf of space in a building, so in this case there are about 3,845 people working there (at 961,000 total sf) for a total of $1,189 per worker in taxes. So in addition to all of the immeasurable benefits to the City of Mr. Bigwig working in town (support for local business, etc.), he accounts for about $2,450 in tax revenue. That has to be more than it costs the City to have him working there.

Good points black n gold. Thanks for crunching the numbers.
By the way, I looked it up out of curiosity and the PPG Place complex is actually close to 1.5 mil. sq ft. :P

[themaguffin]

Expanded boundaries or not, this discussion brings up a good point - what really can be developed in the current (of if expanded one day, "traditional") city limits/urban core?

I disagree with downtown needing to be diverse housing rent. I like the idea of affordable housing, but it's not realistic. Downtowns are pricey to develop and just typically high demand. Even if something is introduced to the market at an affordable rate, how long do you think that will last in resale?

All it means is that the first owner gets a deal.

I think that the city (and county) should encourage new housing stock wherever possible. I know we all hate to see old structures demolished, but the fact is that the city (and region) is blessed with a vast amount of pre war housing and a lot of people find it obsolete.

It is incredibly expensive to put central air in some (many) of these homes.

And while many of these homes offer overall a fair amount of square feet, they are dispersed into many smaller rooms due to the narrow nature of the dense developments. This is not all bad and I am not suggesting tearing down old row houses or the like for McMansions, but there simply needs to be new housing stock and varieties at that.

And I bet with the right program and if coordinated properly, there could be additional spots besides a slag heap and an island for more than one off new housing.

I also agree several areas should see new high rise apartments like Oakland, both around Baum and South Oakland should be examined too.

There are still pockets of land on the Southside that can be developed.

And because I like to throw it out every month or so, level Allegheny Ctr and put an incredible development there - that could be a very large cluster of high rises that would not only provide a lot of life to the Northshore without compromising the area (since it was already compromised decades ago) and allow for many, many residents very close to downtown where housing is limited and opportunities for new housing are limited.

The Strip should continue its organic growth, but should not be limited to re-use. New structures that pay respect to the existing buildings should fill in some gaps.

And on and on....

[Brandon716]

Wouldn't redeveloping the Hill district and really everything between downtown and Oakland be a good priority? It seems like its a never-never land stuck between some amazing neighborhoods. Oakland, South Side, and Downtown should be connected by a redeveloped area inbetween.

[Black-n-Gold]

Good points black n gold. Thanks for crunching the numbers.
By the way, I looked it up out of curiosity and the PPG Place complex is actually close to 1.5 mil. sq ft. :P

I used the area for just One PPG because that's what the appraised value / taxes I calculated was for.

[Black-n-Gold]

Don't forget about the city's "business privilege tax", which is imposed on gross revenue of businesses in the city. Mr Bigwig commuter might live outside the city, but his business is being taxed inside it...

Very good point.

[Grimacista]

Although Pittsburgh faces a lot of financial obstacles, the one thing it does not need to do is go with the proposed option that triples the 'Emergency Service Tax' to $145, at least for those that live and work in the city. If you already live in the city and pay city taxes to police, fire, ems, why should you have to pay another tax for that if you work in the city? That just seems to be counterintuitive - but then again, this is Pennsylvania.

[hyperion1110]

:previous: Word, Evergrey.

Black-n-Gold, you make some good points. There's no doubt that Mr. Bigwig does indirectly contribute a good bit to the city. However, I'm stuck on two points. First, unless I'm confused (or its different for commercial property), the city-school district millage rate is just under 11. Your number seems a bit high to me (but I'm not expert!). And second, assuming your arrived at number is accurate, I don't think the $2450 in taxes he contributes is equal to the expenses. A quick list of the resources he draws upon would include Police/Fire/EMS, city-maintained roads, and city water/sewage. Now, you could argue that his taxes are a wash with the expenses (which would be a difficult sell, since the city spends like $200+ million a year on the servives listed above), Mr. Bigwig again taxes the city resouces when he brings little Jimmy in for a Bucs game, his wife Margie in for the opera, and when he brings his girl-on-the-side Trashwanda to a bar on the South Side.

My point is that the city has all of these great jobs and cultural amenities, and it gains little in terms of taxes.

As for Pittsburgh gaining population, I think it will, slowly (which is good, in my opinion). Already, the city is younger than the surrounding region. That in and of itself is a plus. Also, I think more and more suburbanites are getting tired of spending two hours a day, five days a week in traffic. Working in Oakland as I do, I hear from countless people that they would LOVE to move into the city if they could find a place. Already a HUGE number of people working in Oaklnd live in Squirrel Hill/Shadyside. But those neighborhoods are basically saturated.

Going vertical is the way to solve the density problem. Oakand itself could sustain substantial high rise development. And I'm with themaguffin on Allegheny Center: tear it down and build it up with high density housing! Back in the days of old Allegheny City, there were about 150K people living in the same area that 65K do now. What happened?? I'll tell you: housing projects, highways, Allegheny Center, and retarded ass stadiums. Despite this, there is still a tremendous amount of usable land on the lower North Side (there still is no such thing as the North Shore!). You want room for development? There's plenty here!

[hyperion1110]

Although Pittsburgh faces a lot of financial obstacles, the one thing it does not need to do is go with the proposed option that triples the 'Emergency Service Tax' to $145, at least for those that live and work in the city. If you already live in the city and pay city taxes to police, fire, ems, why should you have to pay another tax for that if you work in the city? That just seems to be counterintuitive - but then again, this is Pennsylvania.

I'm with you on that. I live and work here myself, and I never got why I paid it. Then again, I'm cool with it if it helps the city out.

[PA Pride]

I disagree with downtown needing to be diverse housing rent. I like the idea of affordable housing, but it's not realistic. Downtowns are pricey to develop and just typically high demand. Even if something is introduced to the market at an affordable rate, how long do you think that will last in resale?

All it means is that the first owner gets a deal.

You bring up a great point and I have a solution: I think some low cost developer should try building a large, high unit count highrise in downtown with a mix of for sale condos and rental units. The way to keep it affordable is to pack as many units as possible into this building. It would have to be big. Minimum 25 floors tall perhaps. And the units would be tiny. Let's say 300-600 sq ft. That would prevent resalers from turning around and selling them for huge profits. As long as you could keep these units at maybe 50-100k. Or rentals for 300-500 per month, there would be NO competition in that price range and lots of students or lower-middle income downtown workers could afford them. And it would contribute to downtowns vibrancy.

Now i know it's expensive to buy land and build in a city center like that, so you would need maybe 350+ units in this building to make it work. 350 units that sell brand new for an average of $65,000 would mean about $23,000,000.

[themaguffin]

I agree with you on much of that, but I also feel that a high demand neighborhood should have higher rents then $500. In fact I think it is a disservice with a few exceptions. I would never expect to rent a downtown apt even a tiny one in any decent size city for less than upper hundreds $ - $1000 or so.

Everyone deserves options for affordable housing options and some affordable options should be made for downtown, but it should be relative to what downtown commands, not what other areas go for.

Regarding the comment above about the Hill District. I agree. I think that it is overlooked and frankly not very dense. The Hill can be greatly improved and I don't think it is at all a lost cause or has to be a situation that pushed all of the current residents out. The lower hill/arena development in the 90s is successful and perhaps similar projects could be built further in etc...?

[Black-n-Gold]

First, unless I'm confused (or its different for commercial property), the city-school district millage rate is just under 11. Your number seems a bit high to me (but I'm not expert!).

City of Pittsburgh Property Tax Millage: 10.8
Pittsburgh City School District Millage: 13.92
Total Property Tax Millage: 24.78

Sources: http://www.alleghenycounty.us/treasure/millmuni.asp
http://www.alleghenycounty.us/treasure/millsd.asp


A quick list of the resources he draws upon would include Police/Fire/EMS, city-maintained roads, and city water/sewage. Now, you could argue that his taxes are a wash with the expenses (which would be a difficult sell, since the city spends like $200+ million a year on the servives listed above),

Surely Mr. Bigwig uses these resources less than someone who lives in a $100,000 house in the City. Their property taxes would be $2,472, or about the same as Mr. Bigwig pays to the City in the example above.

Ignoring that, let's make a BIG assumption that ALL of the $200 million in services you mentioned above is completely due to workers commuting to the City. There are 340,000 jobs in the City. Let's take a wild guess that 1/2 of these jobs are commuters from other municipalities for a total of 170,000 commuting jobs. On a per commuter basis, $200 million works out to $1,176 - which is less than half of what we figured Mr. Bigwig is paying in just two tax types.

Mr. Bigwig again taxes the city resouces when he brings little Jimmy in for a Bucs game, his wife Margie in for the opera, and when he brings his girl-on-the-side Trashwanda to a bar on the South Side.

My point is that the city has all of these great jobs and cultural amenities, and it gains little in terms of taxes.

Bucs game: 5% Amusement tax paid to the city, 37.5% parking tax paid to the city, Bucs organization pays for extra police time, 3% of the player's income for that game paid to the City.

Opera: 5% Amusement tax paid to the city, 37.5% parking tax paid to the city

South Side Bar: 37.5% parking tax paid to the city, 7% drink tax paid to the county.


A little thought experiment: if people coming into the City from the surrounding communities is such a drain on the City, would the City be better or worse off if nobody crossed the City line?

[Evergrey]

A little thought experiment: if people coming into the City from the surrounding communities is such a drain on the City, would the City be better or worse off if nobody crossed the City line?

I'll respond with an equally vacuous thought experiment: Would the FC be better off if nobody there worked in the City?

The bottom line is that the City is a regional employment center with a local tax base. Due to its tiny boundaries and limited taxing powers, it lacks the ability to extract the resources necessary to support infrastructure and services that are consumed by a regional population. The Pittsburgh Region strains under a hyper-fragmented system of local governance. Other than isolationist wealth enclaves like the FC and exurban townships endowed with copious land primed for sprawl development, most suburban municipalities are also ill-equipped to respond to the economic realities of the 21st century. The region takes small-town approaches to metropolitan challenges. The fragmentation engenders intra-regional economic cannibalization, demographic hyper-sorting, inefficiency of services and infrastructure, and dramatic disparities in socio-economic indicators.

Whether one supports a commuter tax, a regional tax base sharing program (a la the Twin Cities, or on a limited basis... our Regional Asset District) or structural consolidation... the reality is clear... Pittsburgh the City and Pittsburgh the Region cannot continue to operate under its status quo governance regime.

This blogpost (and P/G opinion piece) by Harold Miller from last year is pertinent to this discussion... and while it doesn't advocate a commuter tax... it does make the critical points about the City's enormous economic importance to the region... and how its artificially small municipal area restricts its ability to remain financially vibrant:

http://pittsburghfuture.blogspot.com/2008/08/our-regions-future-depends-on-our-small.html

Sunday, August 03, 2008

Our Region's Future Depends on Our Small City

Our region’s ego took a hit last month when the Census estimated that the City of Pittsburgh is now only the 59th largest city in the U.S., down from 54th in 2000, and smaller than places like Aurora, Colorado and Bakersfield, California. In 1950, Pittsburgh was the 10th largest city in the country, but its population has dropped by over 50% since then, one of the largest population declines among any major city.

What caused this precipitous drop? High taxes? The loss of the steel industry? Bad city management?

The primary explanation is actually quite simple – with only 55.6 square miles, Pittsburgh is one of the tiniest of the major cities in the nation. Among central cities in the top 40 regions, only Boston, Miami, Minneapolis, Providence, and San Francisco are smaller in land area than Pittsburgh. Most big cities have at least twice the land area that Pittsburgh does.

In cities with more land area, many people who moved “to the suburbs” stayed within the corporate limits of the central city. But in Pittsburgh, the suburbs are different municipalities, and suburbanization meant population loss for the city.

However, while residents moved out, their jobs did not. Although Pittsburgh ranks only 59th in the number of residents, it ranks 25th in the number of jobs located in the City (in businesses of all types). In 2004, there were nearly 300,000 jobs in the City of Pittsburgh, more than in many cities that are much bigger in terms of population. And the City would probably rank even higher if it weren’t so small; Pittsburgh ranks 6th in the country in jobs per square mile, behind only Boston, Miami, New York, San Francisco, and Washington, DC.

The jobs located in the City of Pittsburgh support families throughout the entire region. In fact, only about a third are filled by people who live in the City. Nearly 200,000 people, from every county in southwestern Pennsylvania and from West Virginia and Ohio, come to Pittsburgh every day to work.

http://bp1.blogger.com/_7fRAfeCbNqE/SJWzoQPNNHI/AAAAAAAAAG0/xI6CigQXS-c/s1600-h/RegionalJobsinCityofPittsburgh_22252_image001.gif

Most people don’t realize how much our region’s economy depends on the City of Pittsburgh. More than 1 out of every 4 jobs in the Pittsburgh metro area are located in the City. Moreover, the City houses three-quarters of the region’s higher education jobs, half of the jobs in finance and company headquarters, and over one-third of the jobs in professional services, health care, and arts and entertainment. Several of these are the sectors that have created almost all of the region’s job growth in the past several years.

And of course, the City doesn’t offer just jobs; it is also the region’s primary source for advanced health care, higher education, culture, entertainment, and sports, which are major attractions for talented workers, regardless of where in the region they live.

The challenge for the City is providing the public services needed to support these jobs and regional attractions, but with a tax base that depends primarily on a shrinking base of residents. Raising tax rates on either businesses or residents won’t work, because it’s too easy for either group to move across the City line to escape them. So it’s critical for the City to attract more residents in order to increase its tax base.

http://bp3.blogger.com/_7fRAfeCbNqE/SJWzodmnipI/AAAAAAAAAG8/iFXwu1PHNuI/s1600-h/CommutingandTaxes.gif

Aren’t the City’s high tax rates a major deterrent to living in the City? Yes, but high gasoline prices are an equally high deterrent to living in the suburbs. What most commuters save in taxes by living in the suburbs is now more than offset by the cost of gasoline and depreciation on their car.

Because of the central role Pittsburgh plays in the region’s economy, it’s a priority for the entire region to make sure the City can attract and retain residents. Strengthening the City’s finances and improving the quality of the City schools are particularly important. Our region’s future depends on having a healthy central city.

(A shorter version of this post appeared in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Sunday, August 3, 2008.)


...


Here's a neat chart... Pittsburgh Region Municipalities Sorted by Percentage of Workers who Worked Outside their Municipality of Residence

http://www.briem.com/frag/PghDemoRank4.htm

[AaronPGH]

WOW! What a great opportunity to show off Pittsburgh to the world.

____________________________________________

World leaders to hold economic summit in Pittsburgh
Thursday, May 28, 2009
By Ed Blazina, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Pittsburgh will host the world's major economic powers at a G-20 gathering in September.

The White House made the announcement at a press briefing in Washington, D.C. this afternoon. The summit will be held on Sept. 24 and 25.

Presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs said the U.S. agreed to host the next summit during the London meeting. Pittsburgh is "a good place" to hold the summit becasue of its recovery from the decline of the steel industry in the 1980s, he said.

At the Pittsburgh Summit, President Obama will meet with leaders representing 85 percent of the world's economy to take stock of progress made since the Washington and London Summits and discuss further actions to assure a sound and sustainable recovery from the global economic and financial crisis, he said.

The G-20 includes Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union (along with the European Central Bank).

The most recent summit occurred in April in London, President Barack Obama's first major international conference.

Previous conferences have spawned demonstrations that have sometimes become violent in the host cities. Pittsburgh had a peaceful protest in April during the London conference when marchers went from Market Square to the Federal Building on Liberty Avenue.
More details in tomorrow's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

First published on May 28, 2009 at 1:55 pm

Read more: "World leaders to hold economic summit in Pittsburgh" - http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09148/973412-28.stm#ixzz0GpIFs2Ks&A

[Brandon716]

Wow.. Just wow. The G20 meeting is a big deal.

[hyperion1110]

WOW! What a great opportunity to show off Pittsburgh to the world.

____________________________________________

World leaders to hold economic summit in Pittsburgh
Thursday, May 28, 2009
By Ed Blazina, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Pittsburgh will host the world's major economic powers at a G-20 gathering in September.

The White House made the announcement at a press briefing in Washington, D.C. this afternoon. The summit will be held on Sept. 24 and 25.

Presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs said the U.S. agreed to host the next summit during the London meeting. Pittsburgh is "a good place" to hold the summit becasue of its recovery from the decline of the steel industry in the 1980s, he said.

At the Pittsburgh Summit, President Obama will meet with leaders representing 85 percent of the world's economy to take stock of progress made since the Washington and London Summits and discuss further actions to assure a sound and sustainable recovery from the global economic and financial crisis, he said.

The G-20 includes Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union (along with the European Central Bank).

The most recent summit occurred in April in London, President Barack Obama's first major international conference.

Previous conferences have spawned demonstrations that have sometimes become violent in the host cities. Pittsburgh had a peaceful protest in April during the London conference when marchers went from Market Square to the Federal Building on Liberty Avenue.
More details in tomorrow's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

First published on May 28, 2009 at 1:55 pm

Read more: "World leaders to hold economic summit in Pittsburgh" - http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09148/973412-28.stm#ixzz0GpIFs2Ks&A

That's just awesome! And we managed it without a mega-hotel attached to the convention center! :D

Seriously, though, it's really sad that the world economies have fallen so far they're all coming to Pittsburgh to see how we roll. This is huge...this is really, really huge! Perhaps our fair city's days of international obscurity are at an end?!

And now, queue the triumphant llama-riding banana :banaride:

[AaronPGH]

yeah, I'm actually still not believing this.....insane!

[Brandon716]

Pittsburgh serves as a good example of how to bounce back, so its a positive story all in all. The decision was obviously made by someone in the Obama administration. They had already decided to bring it back to the US, and someone in the admin decided to make the choice Pittsburgh.

[themaguffin]

holy crap.

[Evergrey]

Pittsburgh serves as a good example of how to bounce back, so its a positive story all in all. The decision was obviously made by someone in the Obama administration. They had already decided to bring it back to the US, and someone in the admin decided to make the choice Pittsburgh.

Probably Obama himself... who is a Steeler fan ... the new BFF of Steeler owner / Ambassador to Ireland Dan Rooney ... (gee, maybe Steelerism has its positives? :haha: )... he also remarked on how he was amazed by Pittsburgh's unexpected beauty and vibrancy during speeches after touring the city during his campaign stops... and he invited the founders of Pamela's to make pancakes for his family on Memorial Day... It's good for Pittsburgh and other traditional cities to have someone like Obama in the White House

[themaguffin]

While it won't be the first time Pittsburgh has hosted foreign heads of state, only a decade ago Clinton invited the Britsh PM to dinner at Mt Washington, but this is much much bigger.

[pj3000]

Probably Obama himself... who is a Steeler fan ... the new BFF of Steeler owner / Ambassador to Ireland Dan Rooney ... (gee, maybe Steelerism has its positives? :haha: )

You beat me to it, Evergrey. It's gotta be all because of the Steelers.:haha:

Regardless of views on G-20 summits, this is a great day for Pittsburgh and all rustbelt cities. Maybe this will be that "tipping point" for the city's resurgence. The amount of attention that will be paid to Pittsburgh is going to be amazing.

[bradjl2009]

:previous: Word, Evergrey.

Black-n-Gold, you make some good points. There's no doubt that Mr. Bigwig does indirectly contribute a good bit to the city. However, I'm stuck on two points. First, unless I'm confused (or its different for commercial property), the city-school district millage rate is just under 11. Your number seems a bit high to me (but I'm not expert!). And second, assuming your arrived at number is accurate, I don't think the $2450 in taxes he contributes is equal to the expenses. A quick list of the resources he draws upon would include Police/Fire/EMS, city-maintained roads, and city water/sewage. Now, you could argue that his taxes are a wash with the expenses (which would be a difficult sell, since the city spends like $200+ million a year on the servives listed above), Mr. Bigwig again taxes the city resouces when he brings little Jimmy in for a Bucs game, his wife Margie in for the opera, and when he brings his girl-on-the-side Trashwanda to a bar on the South Side.

My point is that the city has all of these great jobs and cultural amenities, and it gains little in terms of taxes.

As for Pittsburgh gaining population, I think it will, slowly (which is good, in my opinion). Already, the city is younger than the surrounding region. That in and of itself is a plus. Also, I think more and more suburbanites are getting tired of spending two hours a day, five days a week in traffic. Working in Oakland as I do, I hear from countless people that they would LOVE to move into the city if they could find a place. Already a HUGE number of people working in Oaklnd live in Squirrel Hill/Shadyside. But those neighborhoods are basically saturated.

Going vertical is the way to solve the density problem. Oakand itself could sustain substantial high rise development. And I'm with themaguffin on Allegheny Center: tear it down and build it up with high density housing! Back in the days of old Allegheny City, there were about 150K people living in the same area that 65K do now. What happened?? I'll tell you: housing projects, highways, Allegheny Center, and retarded ass stadiums. Despite this, there is still a tremendous amount of usable land on the lower North Side (there still is no such thing as the North Shore!). You want room for development? There's plenty here!

Maybe Pittsburgh should do with Uptown and Oakland as what has been done in Vancouver, BC; require only highrises can be built in a section of the city. It worked over there, it can def work here. Now to the G-20 summit for Pittsburgh. Truly, this may be huge for us. Pres Obama def did this for our city somehow but this is a victory for all of the traditional cities in the Northeast and Midwest. We finally have a President that doesn't see the American Dream as living in some sprawl neighborhood in Charlotte, FL, AZ, etc.! I do remember Clinton and the British PM and I was Downtown that day and it was bad getting around. Now imagine 20 of the world's leaders here along with people part of the summit and the protestors and you have two days that many comapnies and schools in the Golden Triangle will likely close over dealing with everything going on. This is a great honor on our city and we should be very proud.

[pj3000]

Wouldn't redeveloping the Hill district and really everything between downtown and Oakland be a good priority? It seems like its a never-never land stuck between some amazing neighborhoods. Oakland, South Side, and Downtown should be connected by a redeveloped area inbetween.

Should be a top priority. It seems all of us on this Pittsburgh thread wish for a light-rail line connecting Downtown and Oakland as a major step necessary to really bring large-scale development to the Hill. I think that a continuous, vibrant core rising from the Point to the East End neighborhoods would distinguish Pittsburgh as one of America's great urban centers.

[PA Pride]

I can't wait to see the photo op of the worlds leaders all biting into primantis sandwiches.

[Black-n-Gold]

After having some on Memorial Day, Obama just had to get back as soon as he could for Pamela's.

[Evergrey]

I can't wait to see the photo op of the worlds leaders all biting into primantis sandwiches.

nothin' against Primanti's... but I'm hoping for something a little less cliche... hopefully the global media doesn't dwell too much on the usual suspects like Iron City beer, Terrible Towels, etc.

[Ditchdigger]

World leaders to hold economic summit in Pittsburgh

I bet they make good money. Can we tax them while they're working here in town? :D

[pj3000]

nothin' against Primanti's... but I'm hoping for something a little less cliche... hopefully the global media doesn't dwell too much on the usual suspects like Iron City beer, Terrible Towels, etc.

agreed... i had to cringe a bit when i saw the coverage of the press conference and obama's press sec. mentioned the terrible towel... maybe we can finally get past a a cheap strip of yellow terry-cloth as the symbol of our beautiful city

[themaguffin]

What will happen is that they will not leave the location of the summit, but reporters will do stories on the city which might include on location primanti's stuff, which is fine, as it will "we're that the famous sandwich place..." just like Buffalo or Philly or some other city's trademark stuff. They won't bash Pittsburgh. The media will highlight chamber talking points and show off the positive stuff that makes Pittsburgh very worthy of hosting such an event. This will be very good for Pittsburgh.

It's possible, perhaps that the leaders might be a function at something like the Carnegie etc, but given the tight schedules and the security involved + protests, I don't expect much of that.

[Evergrey]

this is gonna be so awesome
http://johnharding.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/ss-090402-g20-01ss_full.jpg

hopefully Stephen Harper shows up for the G20 group photo this time
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45626000/jpg/_45626597_g20family_getty_766.jpg

http://www.blables.com/images/comics/harper-g20-summit.jpg

http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/photos/2009/04/02/harper-g20-cp-6502104.jpg

http://media.hamiltonspectator.topscms.com/images/b2/90/43ed5bc841c3be229967b6d79eef.jpeg

http://majimbokenya.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/prime-minister-stephen-harper-waves-with-wife-laureen-son-ben-and-daughter-rachel-as-they-leave-for-london-from-the-ottawa-international-airport-on-tuesday-march-31-2009-sean-kilpatrick.jpg

[cdc]

looks like all the exits on I-376 from Monroeville to Ft Pitt Bridge
are going to get renumbered, again. Oh boy...


http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_627215.html

The Parkway West and part of Route 60 could be designated as an extension of Interstate 376 by year's end, potentially bringing federal money for the roadway and business opportunities to Pittsburgh International Airport, PennDOT officials said Thursday.
...

PennDOT will start work this year to renumber exits along I-376 between the Fort Pitt Bridge and Monroeville to match with mileposts along the new alignment, he said.

[themaguffin]

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary

_______________________________________________________
For Immediate Release May 28, 2009

PRESS BRIEFING BY
PRESS SECRETARY ROBERT GIBBS

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room


1:54 P.M. EDT

MR. GIBBS: One quick announcement before we get started. The United States will host the next G20 summit, September 24th through the 25th, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.



Q Where?



Q What?



MR. GIBBS: Did I get a little murmur there? That's -- there's a Terrible Towel back there somewhere, wasn’t there? There you go.



At the Pittsburgh summit, President Obama will meet with leaders representing 85 percent of the world's economy, take stock of the progress made since the Washington and London summits, and discuss further actions to assure a sound and sustainable recovery from the global economic and financial crisis.



Q Why Pittsburgh?



MR. GIBBS: At the conclusion of the meeting in London the group had to make a decision about where the next summit would be. Because a lot of people will be in our country for the U.N. General Assembly meeting, the President offered to host the next meeting; the group agreed with that, and we identified Pittsburgh as a good place to do that.



Q Why?



MR. GIBBS: I think it's an area that has seen its share of economic woes in the past but because of foresight and investment is now renewed -- giving birth to renewed industries that are creating the jobs of the future. And I think the President believes it would be a good place to highlight some of that.



Q Isn't it unusual to have two meetings in here?



MR. GIBBS: For the G20? This is -- they were going to do this at some point in the next -- after London, so it's not --it's on the regular schedule of things.

Apparently the Beltway crowd was perplexed by the decision and the video I guess better shows the snobbery.

Won't it be great once the world descends upon Pittsburgh and they see that there ignorance is validated when everyone sees what the city really instead of the videos from 1982 and the 3 monday nights a year when America sees smoldering steel coming back from commercial breaks to watch the Steelers?

[AaronPGH]

Do you guys have a link to that video? I'd like to see it.

[themaguffin]

Could this be the reason why Pittsburgh was chosen...?

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09146/972657-84.stm

:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: