Recent comments in /f/pittsburgh
ktxhopem3276 t1_jd316gy wrote
Reply to comment by YIMBYYay in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
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.
[deleted] t1_jd314ia wrote
Reply to comment by Moogottrrgr in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_jd30wa6 wrote
Reply to comment by 69FunnyNumberGuy420 in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
[deleted]
buksrevenge t1_jd30k2f wrote
From the article:
"Walnut to get a zoning review from the city has jumped from $15,000 to $255,00, an increase of nearly 600 percent. And that's just one of more than a half-dozen other city reviews it will need."
Wut? lol.
Who wrote this garbage? Who edited it?
ktxhopem3276 t1_jd3081f wrote
Reply to comment by igloojoe11 in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
The new rate is 0.3% of development cost.
How much they raised it by is irrelevant.
Throwing around random dollar amounts is annoying at best and being deceptive at worst. These buildings will stand for 50-100 years and should be reviewed thoroughly by the city.
Nimbys and astroturfing shills should be the focus of our outrage at reasonable developments being stymied
YIMBYYay t1_jd2zr36 wrote
Reply to comment by Moogottrrgr in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
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_jd2zdpv wrote
Reply to comment by YIMBYYay in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
You think trickle-down economics improved the world too, huh?
Gnarlsaurus_Sketch t1_jd2z32u wrote
Reply to comment by Bolmac in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
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.
TheLittleParis t1_jd2yo6k wrote
Reply to comment by James19991 in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
Yeah, I had concerns about Gainey from the beginning since he didn't seem to have much in the way of legislative accomplishments or a detailed policy platform compared to Peduto. I tried to keep an open mind in the first year, but it seems clear now that he just doesn't have an interest in policy or the day-to-day management of city services.
69FunnyNumberGuy420 t1_jd2y0n7 wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
The existing calculator won't show us what the fees used to be, and a $15K to $255K jump is an insane claim.
69FunnyNumberGuy420 t1_jd2xw51 wrote
Reply to comment by Gnarlsaurus_Sketch in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
Economics exists as a "science" to backfill an explanation for what the capital-holding classes want to do anyway. You know that and I know that.
My favorite economics story is from the book Princes of the Yen, wherein Japan sent their youngest and brightest minds to Chicago to learn economics, and they took what they learned there and trashed the Japanese economy for over three decades and counting. Good stuff.
higmy6 t1_jd2xse1 wrote
Reply to comment by James19991 in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
I mean I just didn’t want Moreno or whatever his name was
Gnarlsaurus_Sketch t1_jd2xftw wrote
Reply to comment by 69FunnyNumberGuy420 in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
Behavioral economics makes very different assumptions than the rational choice theory you're describing. Also, many if not most seemingly irrational decisions can be explained by incomplete access to information or people valuing money differently.
Yours is a common and, to some extent, valid criticism of classical and neoclassical economics. That said, don't throw the baby out with the bath water here.
[deleted] t1_jd2xfg9 wrote
Reply to comment by 69FunnyNumberGuy420 in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
The city has the zoning fee calculator online if you’d care to look.
[deleted] t1_jd2x5hf wrote
Reply to comment by uglybushes in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
We half-ass tax land at a severely undervalued rate, but then also tax improvements as well as land transfers.
NSlocal t1_jd2wxmn wrote
Reply to comment by Redditmedaddy69 in Was Grant’s Hill an Indian burial mound, or a natural feature? by anonymiz123
There were many suspected mounds, some confirmed. There are numerous newspaper clippings about them being found in Wester PA and along the OH river valley. Typically if there was one there would be more nearby.
[deleted] t1_jd2wi7r wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
The city requires a temporary lane closure permit, which isn’t free.
revolutionoverdue t1_jd2v3t8 wrote
Reply to comment by James19991 in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
Same reason I’m hopeful that the Bucs can compete each year in spring training.
NSlocal t1_jd2ul2c wrote
Reply to comment by Eubadom in Was Grant’s Hill an Indian burial mound, or a natural feature? by anonymiz123
It hasn't been confirmed and should remain on the DL. There's another suspected mound nearby but this one is clearly marked no trespassing.
YIMBYYay t1_jd2u31j wrote
Reply to comment by Bolmac in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
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.
James19991 t1_jd2tw0l wrote
Reply to comment by revolutionoverdue in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
I will never understand why this sub was so in love with Gainey two years ago when there was never any evidence he would be better than average at best.
[deleted] t1_jd2to49 wrote
Reply to comment by askmeaboutmysciatica in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
[deleted]
DennisG47 t1_jd2tkcp wrote
Reply to comment by Aggravating_Foot_528 in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
As Tommy Bolt might say, "Bullshit, it's a plain 255,000."
Bolmac t1_jd2tgf6 wrote
Reply to comment by YIMBYYay in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
I support the lefty activists and development oversight. Cities should be built in a rational manner.
Moogottrrgr t1_jd31gw7 wrote
Reply to comment by YIMBYYay in Let's pour one out for the developers of Pittsburgh by PublicCommenter
By allowing rich developers to replace affordable houses with giant unaffordable apartments in the hopes that someday they will become slums?