We're a far way from achieving that modest vision as pathetic projects like the Point Park Student Playhouse indicate.

P.s. if you want to get angy about some part of the new point park renders, focus your rage at that horrible asymmetric seating bank in the main theater. I thought we stopped doing that in the 70s.

I assume this is a reference to the one small peak section, because the vast majority of the complex is way shorter than that.

Yes, and as a result filling up so much Downtown land with a low-rise student theater complex results in a very low-density use of that land. That's my point.

Oh, I think they still mean something, if you start with the principle that just because you are talking about a student theater, that doesn't mean you can ignore every best practice in urban development.

But sure, if you think "but it's a theater!" is a get-out-of-jail-free card, then there is no point discussing all the ways in which this project is terrible. It may be terrible by normal standards, but it's a theater!, so it is all actually OK.

And yet we are often doing fine as long as it is normal for-profit developers bidding for development opportunities.

It is when non-developer entities (universities, sports teams, foundations, etc.) and their captive politicians are running the show that things tend to go so wrong.

Well, that's just the thing. I don't view it as a matter of public concern if Point Park's student theaters are not great theaters. That affects a few students and a small number of non-student theater goers, but that is ultimately a private issue.

But ignoring the Historic Preservation Code? Horrific street design? Gross underutilization of Downtown land? Those are matters of public concern.

And that was my biggest misgiving concerning Peduto... he unabashedly proclaimed himself an ally of the nonprofit/foundation community during his campaign. So far this political calculation has manifested with him supporting disastrous urban design twice... August Wilson bailout and Point Park's peewee playhouse.

Yep. In many ways he is an old school David Lawrence style politician. So those hoping for a technocrat are often going to be disappointed.

Yes, I tend to agree that Homestead has one of the most attractive business districts that is very comparable to E. Carson Street.

Cool article about how they are integrating new water management techniques into the redevelopment of Larimer:

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/ci...s/201501260008

In this article on the interior decor of the Hotel Monaco, it notes they have ordered a statute of a Great Dane (the official state dog) to stand in front of the hotel:

http://www.post-gazette.com/life/fas...s/201501260017

This article on the revival of the One Grandview project is mostly old news at this point, but it does mention that the development would "reach up to 12 stories":

http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/7...#axzz3PvyEjMVy

That could be cool.

In this television interview with Walnut Capital, they mention they are breaking ground on Bakery Living 2 (the second large apartment building), and that the final residential phase of townhouses should follow later this year:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n5-...ature=youtu.be

Meanwhile once they get an anchor tenant for the second office building, they will start on that as well. So it sounds like maybe all of Bakery Square 2.0 could be built out as soon as mid-2016.

Quick note about this:

http://www.post-gazette.com/business...s/201501230050

So it appears there was an odd slowdown in the Pittsburgh economy a little bit ago. Specifically, it apparently lasted from about March 2013 through March 2014. However, things picked up again around April 2014, and actually looked very robust in the second half of 2014 (this is all based on employment data).

I'm noting this because the timing of the data in latest Brookings report (they do these periodically) as referenced in this article happens to coincide with that period of slowness. That's not to say we should completely discount it, but for now, at least, it looks like that was just a temporary slowdown in an overall strong trend.

Can't remember if it has been posted before, but this interactive graphic of freight data is supercool:

http://www.brookings.edu/research/re...ht#Interactive

Click on Pittsburgh on the circle (at about 1:30), and it will show how import/exports combined (in dollar values) are distributed to different areas. There are two different visualizations.

One interesting note--as often discussed, there is roughly the same amount of trade with the Northeast as with the Great Lakes (probably a little more in goods trade with the Great Lakes, but I believe there would be more in services trade with the Northeast). So Pittsburgh continues to really straddle both regions in that sense.

My biggest issue with Bakery Square 2.0 is the townhouse aspect. More specifically, the site plans I have seen show they will be serviced by a dead end road, even though it would be trivial to connect it to one of the back streets of Shadyside like Social Way, Rennig Street, or Marchand Street (my prefered choice, since the other two are alleys). It's just bad urban design to allow the interior roads to be effective cul-de-sacs, and it will force people in the complex to drive out onto Penn and backtrack if they want to get to destinations within Shadyside. Of course, they should be walking to South Highland and the like living that close, but still.

I have a vague recollection that was a community-driven decision based on the fact they didn't want BKSQ 2.0 to create a new cut-through from Fifth to Penn that would bypass the busy Fifth/Penn intersection.

Doesn't make it a better outcome, but if that is accurate it means it wasn't Walnut's fault, but the local NIMBYs/public officials.

Edit: By the way, though, it looks to me like 19 or so of the townhouse units will have direct access to Social/Renning/Marchand, I assume from integrated garages:

http://bakery-square.com/wp-content/.../strata_05.jpg

It also looks to me like it would be a trivial change to open up the new internal road to Social if that ever becomes politically viable. But of course ideally the plan would have continued the extension of East Liberty Boulevard all the way to that spur of Marchand, and it doesn't look like that would ever be possible without removing some of the townhouses.

At least there's not a giant brick wall and iron gates around it like a certain neighboring townhouse development.

Marchand would have to be completely overhauled to accommodate the increase in traffic, as it would result in a lot of cut-thru traffic from points west to Bakery Square/Penn Ave and vice versa. It would be a mess.

Ahh...similar to why the next phase of Summerset @ Frick won't link up with Swisshelm Park then? A shame, but I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.

There's a nice little storefront at the corner of Denniston and Marchand I could see going over to retail or dining if there is more pedestrian density in that area.

Regardless, agreed about what the ideal road pattern would be. The whole arterial/cul-de-sac is such a failed model, particularly for urban areas - it's a shame it's so widespread still, at least regarding residential development. At least we know the Lower Hill and ALMONO are going to look more like South Side Works and less like this in terms of road layout however.

Heh. True enough. I do wonder if at some point the gated entrance by Trader Joes will actually be opened up. It's got to be an increasing pain-in-the-ass for residents that they must take a circuitous route (particularly because Aurelia is a one-way in the wrong direction) to get to the increasing number of amenities on Penn Avenue.

I'm sure it would increase traffic, the same way that secondary streets like Sarah Street are used as cuthroughs in the South Side. That's not a reason not to provide connectivity though. After all, without connectivity you only increase congestion on the main streets, and Penn around there is already pretty nightmarishly backed up.

Pittsburgh is Midnorth East-West (Northeast/Midwest)