PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[daviderik]

Originally Posted by Austinlee

I would be willing to create a new one. I was about to do major updates to page 1 anyway to add new projects and delete ones that aren't relevant anymore.

If someone were to start a new thread obviously it would be you Austin. But I don't see why we need a new one. Who cares if it's 1000 pages or a million? But again it's your call.

[TBone7281]

Originally Posted by daviderik

If someone were to start a new thread obviously it would be you Austin. But I don't see why we need a new one. Who cares if it's 1000 pages or a million? But again it's your call.

Like I said, it seems arbitrary and I'm not really sure why it's done here in general. I agree with you and I don't care one way or the other.

But all the cool threads are doing it.

[TBone7281]

Pittsburgh Magazine article on the new planning director.

http://www.pittsburghmagazine.com/Pi...burghs-Future/

I was more or less on board until he defended the new U.S. Steel headquarters with:

I think that a forward-looking city needs to be able to accommodate contemporary building types, including ones that we are more familiar with in suburban locations.

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by TBone7281

Pittsburgh Magazine article on the new planning director.

http://www.pittsburghmagazine.com/Pi...burghs-Future/

I was more or less on board until he defended the new U.S. Steel headquarters with:

What a wonderful article. Every single forumer in this thread needs to read it. He is ridiculously qualified for this job - Planning director for Seattle AND Manhattan?!
He went to Yale and taught at University of Pennsylvania, the University of California, Berkeley and Penn State University. Shit, we are lucky to have him. Along with Peduto and the talented councilman/chief of staff, CMU educated Dan Gilman. This city now has excellent leadership.

[TBone7281]

Originally Posted by Austinlee

What a wonderful article. Every single forumer in this thread needs to read it. He is ridiculously qualified for this job - Planning director for Seattle AND Manhattan?!
He went to Yale and taught at University of Pennsylvania, the University of California, Berkeley and Penn State University. Shit, we are lucky to have him. Along with Peduto and the talented councilman/chief of staff, CMU educated Dan Gilman. This city now has excellent leadership.

It's a fairly long article compared to what some forumers may be used to, but I thought it was a good read. He brought up a fair number of things that have been discussed (sometimes at length) in this thread. It's nice to know that he is so aware after a relatively short time on the job.

Still can't sell me on US Steel though.

[psuhoops123]

The fact he is from Seattle excites me. Some of the architecture style in Seattle especially the houses in the hills is something I would love to see in Pittsburgh. It just looks fresh to me but not tacky like a lot of "modern" plans you see today. I always looked at Seattle as a bigger and nicer Pittsburgh so with him coming here, my expectations are higher than the Space Needle.

[Jonboy1983]

He may be well qualified to be a planning director, but how in the hell is planning for suburban-style architecture in a major urban core "moving forward?" Wow... I thought Houston and Atlanta were examples of NOT how to plan urban cores. Does this guy see Allegheny Center as an overwhelming success? If so, by what logic?!

BTW, I studied city planning at West Chester University. Granted, it's not as fancy as a planning degree at Penn or any of the other schools on his resume, but I know my stuff!

[BrianTH]

I remember reviewing Gastil's resume back when he was appointed. He really is amazingly qualified.

But I have to say, when I read all that stuff about neighborhood vetoes, compromises, pragmatism, etc., I get the impression of a very political person. Which is perhaps necessary in that position, in this City, but I don't know if one can trust Gastil to be an independent voice for urban best practices at every turn. And in fact the US Steel endorsement seems to confirm that.

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by TBone7281

It's a fairly long article compared to what some forumers may be used to, but I thought it was a good read. He brought up a fair number of things that have been discussed (sometimes at length) in this thread. It's nice to know that he is so aware after a relatively short time on the job.

Still can't sell me on US Steel though.

I'm more concerned about the direction that Pittsburgh is heading than any single development project.

[Brentsters]

Of course he needs to be pragmatic. He's a public servant dealing with communities that often have very different points of view and objectives. My guess is that he finds the building as underwhelming as we do but doesn't have the luxury of talking shit on it like us. He can help steer future development better, but it serves no good complaining about a project that is likely beyond his control and moving forward.

I'm certainly no fan of the building, but in no way do I view pragmatism as a flaw. Especially when there are so many messy urban issues that the administration is facing now and in the future.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Brentsters

My guess is that he finds the building as underwhelming as we do but doesn't have the luxury of talking shit on it like us. He can help steer future development better, but it serves no good complaining about a project that is likely beyond his control and moving forward.

It is hard to know what is possible without being behind closed doors. Certainly as a legal matter, the project requires an amendment to the PLDP (it violates the original PLDP in numerous ways), and the Peduto Administration could come out against that amendment. We don't know what Gastil has been advising on that subject, but based on this article, I would not guess he would be a strong advocate of doing so.

[Minivan Werner]

Most forums have a limit on the number of pages or posts before it can be closed and re-started, usually for bandwidth/loading reasons. Not sure if this one does.

[Evergrey]

Indianapolis and Milwaukee added to nonstop destinations from PIT.

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/tra...s/201504240252

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

Indianapolis and Milwaukee added to nonstop destinations from PIT.

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/tra...s/201504240252

The first non-Florida destination i've heard of being added in a long, long time.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

But I have to say, when I read all that stuff about neighborhood vetoes, compromises, pragmatism, etc., I get the impression of a very political person. Which is perhaps necessary in that position, in this City, but I don't know if one can trust Gastil to be an independent voice for urban best practices at every turn. And in fact the US Steel endorsement seems to confirm that.

To me the most heartening thing mentioned was about streamlining city zoning. Pittsburgh has way too many zoning districts. Look at how convoluted the zoning map is already. There are 19 base zoning types - which doesn't include the different densities of residential (very high through very low) and all of the planned unit/specially planned zones (all of which have different rules). For theat matter, the dark blue zones in Downtown, the North Shore and Oakland are all broken up into sub units with their own rules. Not to mention the actual zoning areas are ridiculously detailed in their boundaries, in some cases jogging to pick up a single structure.

I'm not sure where I'd begin to fix this. I do think I'd probably merge Local Neighborhood Commercial, Urban Neighborhood Commercial, Neighborhood Office, and some residential and industrial zones to "mixed use" zones with nothing but form-based zoning requirements. I think some sort of zoning protection should exist to stop the chopping up of larger historic houses, but I don't think that should extend to stopping moderate-density housing in single-family zoned areas. Others may have more in depth ideas here.

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by Austinlee

The first non-Florida destination i've heard of being added in a long, long time.

within the last year-ish:

Bradford, PA
Franklin, PA
Lancaster, PA
Jamestown, NY
Altoona, PA
Nashville, TN

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

within the last year-ish:

Bradford, PA
Franklin, PA
Lancaster, PA
Jamestown, NY
Altoona, PA
Nashville, TN

Um, are 5 of those Cessna flights?

[TBone7281]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

within the last year-ish:

Bradford, PA
Franklin, PA
Lancaster, PA
Jamestown, NY
Altoona, PA
Nashville, TN

World class destinations, every one!

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

Indianapolis and Milwaukee added to nonstop destinations from PIT.

They are using modified corporate jets, which is interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_400

[AaronPGH]

It may be easy to laugh at Sun Air right now, but they seem to be pretty determined to set up a more proper hub. Start with cities like those, then add on a next layer of cities like Erie, Akron/Canton, Buffalo, Harrisburg, etc. Then add in the fact that they interline with the other major airlines here in Pittsburgh and it is not an inconsequential addition. Sure, they'll never be the next US Airways, but these passengers can feed our mainline flights and possibly drive more growth with legacies. Growth is growth, and PIT is finally starting to rack up some wins. Connecting growth is even better.

Here's my big stupid bet for the next year or two: Virgin in PIT, solving a lot of our west coast service issues via SFO. That is, if United keeps fucking around with their lame seasonal / red-eye schedules and nobody else steps up for SAN / LAX / SEA. Their SFO hub is pretty serious – lots of vacation destinations out of it, and the Virgin brand is flashy enough to overcome what happened with JetBlue's arrival here.