Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

YIMBYYay t1_jd36g8u wrote

Reply to comment by ktxhopem3276 in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter

>These buildings will stand for 50-100 years and should be reviewed thoroughly by the city.

Absolutely, which is what PLI does for building permits. Building permit fees can easily be in the tens of thousands to hundreds of thousand because they are technical reviews for health and safety.

The zoning review process should be fairly straightforward and efficient. Unfortunately, the zoning code is so complicated and the review process so capricious that it takes the city many more months to complete than the building permit process.

So, of course, buildings should be reviewed, but the way Pittsburgh does it and the requirements within those reviews have serious negative impacts on housing affordability.

6

Gnarlsaurus_Sketch t1_jd37uq5 wrote

A more agile and visionary administration would be shoulder deep in reforming the zoning and review process by now. Gainey, however, would rather concern himself with speed bumps.

3

RepeatedFailure t1_jd3odvc wrote

The speed bumps slow traffic and make the city more livable. They are a ban-aid on decades of car centric design baked into the fabric of the city.

6

Gnarlsaurus_Sketch t1_jd3pz44 wrote

An ugly, sticky, itchy, obstructive, annoying, wasteful, and noisy band aid. Compared to alternative solutions, the speed bumps needlessly create more fossil fuel and other emissions, increase road noise, and don't increase safety more than other traffic calming measures.

They also increase wear on vehicles, obstruct emergency vehicles, and make suburbanites less likely to patronize city businesses.

Probably the worst "solution" possible IMO. Lane narrowing and chicanes does the same thing, but that is harder to implement. Gainey took the easy but shitty road here.

2

dfiler t1_jd3rvvl wrote

We shouldn't let perfect be the enemy of good. Speed humps have been extremely beneficial in some parts of the city. Sure, a restructuring of our built environment would be a preferable solution. But that's extremely complicated and rarely succeeds. So while we continue pursuit of a better city structure, I am in favor of using speed humps.

7

Gnarlsaurus_Sketch t1_jd3y3yk wrote

Gainey isn't pursuing a better city structure though. He's simply taking the path of least resistance. Taking a bare minimum approach that gives no thought to the long term concerns shouldn't be good enough IMO.

Speed bumps are the very worst method of traffic calming. Literally anything else would be better.

0

S4ltyInt3ractions t1_jd9gyvg wrote

Social protest and just beep your horn over every bump they will be removed quickly

2

Gnarlsaurus_Sketch t1_jda0n4x wrote

Lol. Tempting, along with hard 0-60 pulls followed by slamming on the brakes in between the bumps.

/s

1

burritoace t1_jd63oam wrote

We could marginally slow traffic on a single stretch of road with chicanes or we could marginally slow traffic on many stretches of road with speed bumps. I know which I'd pick! This overheated stuff about their alleged harms does you no favors.

E: I'm no fan of Gainey but this program started under Peduto. Just a very weird thing to get on Gainey's case about.

0

dlppgh t1_jd3ym4x wrote

...it doesn't work that way. For one, Zoning Administrators should and do have a fair amount of autonomy/distance from the Administration. Also - mayors have come into office with all sorts of promises about changing zoning law and reforming the process. What exactly have any of them achieved? Namely, what did Peduto achieve, after promising all sorts of stuff? At the end of the day, it was all about "tweet at Dan Gilman if you need something"...a Kushner-esque process that was similarly ineffective

4

Gnarlsaurus_Sketch t1_jd40kuy wrote

Zoning administrators are tasked with enforcing a Byzantine shithouse maize of restrictions contained within an enigma of a process. Gainey didn't promise much of anything before he was elected - his biggest asset in the primary was not being Peduto. It's no surprise he isn't delivering much when he never promised much in the first place.

Peduto was able to generate positive national attention for Pgh, and attract outside business interest and investment. So far, Gainey has done neither.

5

dlppgh t1_jd92v34 wrote

Like it or not, PGH had positive national press prior to Peduto's administration. Even while Ravenstahl's stature crumpled, the good press kept on going. I think it's fair to point out that this press cycle isn't tied directly to individual mayors in reality. Ravenstahl didn't come in and turn PGH around by himself, nor did Peduto...but both made contributions in that regard.

2

YIMBYYay t1_jd80qa1 wrote

Agree, but counterpoint. Peduto focused far too much on national and international issues, where he had zero impact, at the expense of effective governance in Pittsburgh. Almost all of the anti-development policies in the city were implemented under his watch and zoning staff and planning commission were all Peduto appointees.

Gainey inherited a mess and has let it get worse.

0

JustHereForTheSaul t1_jd3vb5e wrote

This is akin to saying "my mom needs to focus on getting rid of her cancer, but instead she makes herself lunch every day! Misplaced priorities!" The two things have nothing to do with each other, and the slow pace on the monumental task does not in any way affect the more manageable task.

It feels like "speed bumps" are becoming the new "bike lanes" ........ some random shit bitter yinzers bring up as a non sequitur whenever they're upset about something.

3

Gnarlsaurus_Sketch t1_jd3zlwl wrote

More like "My mom needs to focus on getting rid of her cancer, but she's concentrating on eating healthier instead of taking the chemo her doctor recommended." Misplaced priorities indeed. Gainey threw yinz a political bone with the speed bumps, and yinz chomped down on it without question. It does nothing to improve transit or decrease car dependancy.

I'm pro bike lane for the record, at least it makes it easier to not use a full size vehicle. The speed bumps make driving worse and actually slow public transit down instead of improving it.

1

JustHereForTheSaul t1_jd40d83 wrote

I highly doubt Gainey believes speed bumps help alleviate the zoning review issue. Again, they are obviously completely separate issues.

3

Gnarlsaurus_Sketch t1_jd412r6 wrote

Gainey is in over his head. He is looking for anything quick and easy that might give him political points. For him, political points are the issue. The speed bump binge is the quickest and easiest way he has found to score political points, which gives him breathing room on harder issues, such as zoning.

It's basic local politics.

4

JustHereForTheSaul t1_jd41qir wrote

So it sounds like you recognize that these are separate issues, which is why it's mystifying that you brought up speed bumps in the first place. [shrug]

3