JustHereForTheSaul

JustHereForTheSaul t1_jdkoy4k wrote

Not at all; it just hit me weird that he was naming this demographic in the same way a pollster might name "professional women over age 35". I just thought it was an unusual combination of traits to identify a group with. I dunno, looking at it again, maybe it wasn't him, maybe it was me.

6

JustHereForTheSaul t1_jd3wbel wrote

[not a loaded question, just a request for information] Is the city breaking some law with this rate increase? Or is this a more subtle use of courts to manage public policy that I'm not familiar with? I was kinda surprised to see developers calling this "illegal". In my naivete, I'd have thought it was subject only to the laws of economics, not the laws of the city or state.

7

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

JustHereForTheSaul t1_jd3v26g wrote

Yes, but the "article" is ridiculously thin on details, so we don't know if inflation has anything to do with it. I don't know anything about the process, but just looking at the way things have gone in other areas of the city (a major example being the water and sewage system), I'd put a little bit of money down saying that the zoning review office has kept its rates the same for decades because the old people ... dare I say, boomers ... who apply for reviews came to expect cheap zoning reviews as a birthright.

Now we look around and realize that the city is way behind where it should be on those fees, and we have to make a huge jump. Just like we looked around after the flood on Washington Blvd and said "oh crap, we're not charging anywhere NEAR enough to do necessary maintenance and we haven't been for decades, better raise rates 300% overnight." The mismanagement of the past is making today's administrators look bad in the case of PWSA. Again, I would bet something similar is happening with zoning reviews.

4

JustHereForTheSaul t1_j8q33r2 wrote

Fuck, thanks for mentioning it now. I just paid full price for a membership two days ago. Disappointed so far, I was told the chicken wings in the clubhouse were top notch but they're really no better than Hooters.

EDIT: Oh yeah, when do they send out the gay agenda? If the gay recruitment drive is in the summer I might have to make alternate vacation plans.

28

JustHereForTheSaul t1_j5pm45v wrote

I totally agree! But if we're looking for practical solutions, getting these kids' parents to start taking responsibility isn't in the realm of the possible. Changing the schedules isn't the best solution, but it might be the best that we can actually do.

29

JustHereForTheSaul t1_ivzgpdv wrote

I am not big on stunts on bikes, but my kids love going there, and every time I go there I meet people who have traveled hundreds of miles to be there. It's a big, big draw for people who like this sort of thing. They have really cool bike tracks where you can do all kinds of jumps, races, tricks, flips, etc. I wish I had the language for it. Maybe just take the kid there once before you schedule a party to see if it's the kind of thing (s)he would like. You have to try it once!

2

JustHereForTheSaul t1_ivw8hhw wrote

The Wheel Mill was already mentioned but would be a top choice for me. Ascend Climbing Wall might also be an option (never been to a birthday party there, but I think it would be great).

Zone 28 is similar to Chuckie Cheese, but not half as obnoxious. The games are better and they actually have good food.

Schenley Park Ice Rink is yet another option. Or Alpha Ice Complex if you don't want to risk a warm day.

1

JustHereForTheSaul t1_itxd0ya wrote

There is a theory among some urban planners called "induced demand" which states pretty much what you're saying -- if you have a highway that has heavy traffic, and you expand it, it'll be less congested in the short term, but eventually you're going to have just as much traffic as you did before. Because people will see the decrease in congestion and move to that corridor, thus increasing traffic.

I don't know enough to know how true it is, but it makes sense logically.

5