Submitted by PublicCommenter t3_11x56x9 in pittsburgh
YIMBYYay t1_jd2r2t8 wrote
Reply to comment by Bolmac in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
The city adjusted the zoning fee schedule just a few years ago. No one is suggesting that the reviews should be fully subsidized. The problem is the city has spent the past decade making the code and reviews more complicated and time consuming all while complaining about being understaffed. Projects that used to take 3 months to review can now take over a year, and that’s before applying for a building permit.
The development review process in Pittsburgh is broken and is basically run by special interests and lefty activists. Architects, engineers developers and contractors do not have a seat at the table.
JustHereForTheSaul t1_jd3vo99 wrote
>Projects that used to take 3 months to review can now take over a year, and that’s before applying for a building permit.
I get the impression you know more about the process than I do, but as an outsider, can I suggest that maybe this is because they're woefully understaffed and underfunded?
Bolmac t1_jd2tgf6 wrote
I support the lefty activists and development oversight. Cities should be built in a rational manner.
Gnarlsaurus_Sketch t1_jd2z32u wrote
Most of the time, these activists have nothing resembling a workable plan, let alone funding. Their approach to "oversight" is to jam up the process so nothing new ever gets built unless they approve. Which they never do, because they're typical NIMBYs or tankies. People respond much better to complaints when the complainers present a workable solution to the problem they identify.
It blows my mind how resistant some people here are to development, even when Pgh has been badly lagging in this area since the 1980s. We have a declining population and some of the oldest housing stock in the country. Opposing development instead of compromising for smarter, more equitable development is a fool's errand.
ktxhopem3276 t1_jd31hxt wrote
Most of the anti development campaigns are just neighborhood nimbys and sometime worse, landlords astroturfing to reduce competition. Which developments have been blocked by actual housing equity activists?
Big-Naturals69 t1_jd32k5h wrote
Lol take a look at the post history of the dude you’re replying to, I think he has a modest proposal for the housing crisis
Icy_Photograph412 t1_jd3fyrj wrote
But what about the landlords in butler? Why wont you think of the unfortunate landlords
YIMBYYay t1_jd2u31j wrote
The problem is that it isn’t rational in Pittsburgh. And what exactly do you support? Less and more expensive housing? Because that’s what’s the city is serving up.
ktxhopem3276 t1_jd316gy wrote
Lefty activists aren’t against development in most cases in Pittsburgh. Most of the anti development campaigns are just neighborhood nimbys and sometime worse, landlords astroturfing to reduce competition.
YIMBYYay t1_jd34t1u wrote
It's a mixed bag, and many of the NIMBYs are in the DSA/activist circles. Even those not outright anti-development advocate for policies and requirements that make building more time-consuming and expensive without considering the negative impacts. Take a look at the zoning code sometimes; there are some wildly impractical requirements that you can tell no architect or engineer, or even attorney, had any hand in writing.
ktxhopem3276 t1_jd382td wrote
Yeah I agree. With so many people in the room, the end product ends up as a strained compromise that looks nothing like what anybody wants. It’s just so hard to trust the developers to do the right thing. Look at how the news segment uses the old renderings for walnut capitals Oakland crossing project. The current project looks nothing like the pictures they showed originally and people are going to shit a brick when they see that thing built. They got an exception to build a 400 foot long building when they were showing two separate buildings for a long time. I though it was very important urban design principle to not build monolithic super-blocks like this building. The zoning only slows 250 feet which is the average block size in the area. Walnut capital gets whatever they want from the city and I can’t think of a zoning variance they didn’t get so it’s just obnoxious of them and shows how entitled they have become to getting their own way. I can just never tell what is reasonable to bring down costs of housing and what is a profit grab
https://nextpittsburgh.com/city-design/how-one-pittsburgh-developer-wants-to-fix-oaklands-dead-zone/
burritoace t1_jd77sgh wrote
If there aren't specific rent caps associated with a project then it's a profit grab
ktxhopem3276 t1_jd849aj wrote
Everything is a profit grab in a capitalist economy. I think putting up barriers to constructing new housing serves to benefit existing landlords. I disagree with anything that makes it harder or more expensive to build more housing. More supply will lower prices. There is localized gentrification when developers build new expensive housing. I worry about low wage workers being pushed further away from employment and good transit. Requiring developers to provide a percentage of housing for low wage workers is possibly a good solution but it may lead to a little less housing being built overall.
Moogottrrgr t1_jd2zdpv wrote
You think trickle-down economics improved the world too, huh?
YIMBYYay t1_jd2zr36 wrote
No. I believe that you can’t address the housing crisis by making it more time consuming and expensive to build and constraining the supply of housing.
Moogottrrgr t1_jd31gw7 wrote
By allowing rich developers to replace affordable houses with giant unaffordable apartments in the hopes that someday they will become slums?
YIMBYYay t1_jd32i15 wrote
Where in Pittsburgh have affordable houses been knocked down to make way for new apartments?
Moogottrrgr t1_jd337rm wrote
Oh, you must have never been to East Liberty. Sorry.
dlppgh t1_jd3uc2w wrote
https://www.wesa.fm/podcast/land-power
^ highly recommended
But...nary a word about "affordability covenants", which I think it's important to understand when you're talking about affordable housing.
LostEnroute t1_jd4fdm2 wrote
The stories about the buildings coming down are a lot louder than the ones about new affordable housing being built.
Every unit that was demolished in for Whole Foods has been replaced with new builds basically across the street. Did you know that?
Moogottrrgr t1_jd6169j wrote
And where did the people from all the projects go? What about the people living down the street in those cheap apartments on Negley? How many years of negotiations and regulations did it take to get those places replaced, or did the developers do that out of the goodness of their hearts?
Are you honestly trying to tell me that if we just let developers do whatever the hell they wanted, those houses would exist?
LostEnroute t1_jd7n2ff wrote
>Are you honestly trying to tell me that if we just let developers do whatever the hell they wanted, those houses would exist?
Of course they wouldn't exist. I never said that and I agree with holding developers accountable! I just don't think the public realizes how much that actually happens. East Liberty is full of affordable housing and luxury housing. It's a success story.
Moogottrrgr t1_jd7y1tp wrote
This whole thread is full of people insisting that holding developers accountable is going to hinder the growth of affordable housing. I also know a LOT of people who don't consider East Liberty a success story. There's an entire documentary series (East of Liberty) about it.
LostEnroute t1_jd85b38 wrote
Neighborhoods go through transition and I think East Liberty's latest is balanced, considering.
I know the bitter documentary, if it was ever finally pieced together into one. I'm just glad there are less murders and street prostitutes near my home.
Walking the .75 miles from downtown East Liberty to my home was absolutely not a good idea 20 years ago.
Moogottrrgr t1_jd891zj wrote
East Liberty has been a huge success for a middle-aged white lady like me. I agree. I just do not feel good about it.
burritoace t1_jd77ukm wrote
It doesn't seem like that's what they are trying to tell you
YIMBYYay t1_jd33yxv wrote
East Liberty has more below-market housing units now than when the abysmal towers were there. No housing was torn down to make way for the "luxury" apartments.
Moogottrrgr t1_jd34nog wrote
Please have the lobbyist who pays you to make these posts provide you with actual data from an impartial source you can share.
[deleted] t1_jd314ia wrote
[deleted]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments