Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonboy1983
Apparently Luke Ravenstahl isn't happy with that new law. According to that article he lacked the power to stop that going into law. There are things this city does that I like (altho it's in conjunction with PNC and other locally based corporations that DO have a vision), but for the most part, this city is ass backwards. This stupid sign ordinance and the felony against smart planning they're about to commit in Squirrel Hill seem to be the biggest interests for this city unfortunately...
Oh, and at the national level, they're cutting tax credits for renewable energy projects. What the hell are you doing, Obama?
|
Well, the sign ordinance doesn't bother me. Peduto and others don't have anything against LED signs themselves; they were against allowing electronic billboards to be plastered all over the city -- on buildings, on hillsides, all along the parkway, etc. That was the reason for the ordinance. It stopped Idiot Ravenstahl from giving Lamar Advertising (which is one of the most bottom-of-the-barrel companies around) a pass to put billboards up all over the place. It's bad enough we now have a skyline that looks like a fucking tacky xmas tree, at least we don't have 20+ more electronic billboards promoting Bud Light (or whatever beer it is now) like the one you can get a beautiful view of as you cross the Liberty Bridge heading south.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minivan Werner
Why wouldn't they rent the 4 homes on North Forbes and build the condos across from it on the empty lot?
|
For whatever reason, it was obviously easier (cheaper) to demolish the 5 houses and barber shop and build where they are. Also, their location is "North of Forbes"... barely, but it still holds some weak cachet that they can probably justify charging higher prices for.
I believe the lot across the street is part of St. Edmund's. I have no idea if that was even an option the developers looked into.