Huge new project proposed for Oakland... (Pittsburgh, Liberty: apartments, rentals, house)

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by villageidiot1

Yes, during construction. This project would shut down the Bates St. exit for a long time. According to the article, "upon city approval, it would take three to four years to accomplish." Any estimates on how long the exit would be closed?

I think they could make it less awful if they fixed 73A first. Basically construct the Halket extension, and you can get on and off in Oakland from westbound side of 376 without going on Bates at all. Then they can take their time fixing Bates up.

Heading eastbound on 376 from Oakland is still going to require Bates though, so that might be out of commission for awhile.

[Geeo]

This proposal is a lot to take in. It would certainly transform that part of Oakland, which has needed to be updated for years. Bates Street right now is a narrow congested choke point and should be a better gateway to Oakland. I like the idea of the parking garage, which may encourage more off-site parking with the shuttles Pitt and UPMC would provide. I think it's a doable project, and I hope the NIMBYs will see that it will be good for the neighborhood and their property values.

[szug-bot]

Originally Posted by eschaton

A handful of homeowners should not have veto power over a project which would result in positive impacts for several orders of magnitude more people. It's completely ridiculous.

Sounds about right. No one said otherwise.

[WhoIsStanwix?]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

Sounds about right. No one said otherwise.

I am pretty sure that the current process for getting zoning variances approved does allow just a handful of residents to hold projects hostage, though. eschaton knows more on that topic.

[szug-bot]

Originally Posted by WhoIsStanwix?

I am pretty sure that the current process for getting zoning variances approved does allow just a handful of residents to hold projects hostage, though. eschaton knows more on that topic.

not sure i agree. there have been clamors from residents that were squashed, or ignored because the vocal strength was just not big enough. for various things like removing parking, adding parking, whatever.

i think to ADD something, like a parklet or a welcome sign, a small contingent might do well. but to RESIST some more large scale thing, they really would need an neighborhood behind them.

this will be interesting because really, aren't most of the units student/temporary/transient rentals? but again, my concern will be for the nice community on Coltart - which is getting a HUGE high rise at its other end (at Forbes), i hear! Coltart isn't in the cross-hairs, exactly, but with induced traffic, more free-flow traffic (at higher speeds, probably...)...

has there been an actual announcement of this? if eschaton reads this - how are you privy to this???? Are you kevin acklin???????

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by WhoIsStanwix?

I am pretty sure that the current process for getting zoning variances approved does allow just a handful of residents to hold projects hostage, though. eschaton knows more on that topic.

Yes. In extreme cases (like the Garden Block project on the north side) one person can hold up a development that needs variances if they are willing to hire a lawyer.

Originally Posted by szug-bot

not sure i agree. there have been clamors from residents that were squashed, or ignored because the vocal strength was just not big enough. for various things like removing parking, adding parking, whatever.

i think to ADD something, like a parklet or a welcome sign, a small contingent might do well. but to RESIST some more large scale thing, they really would need an neighborhood behind them.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean here, but let me just note that in general making decisions by consensus is a much longer and more unwieldy process than making decisions by simple majority vote (or fiat of course). In some cases consensus decisionmaking is a good process, but I don't think it is when you're discussing development, because someone will always be opposed to something for some reason, which is how in higher-demand areas you end up with absurd housing prices like San Francisco.

Originally Posted by szug-bot

this will be interesting because really, aren't most of the units student/temporary/transient rentals? but again, my concern will be for the nice community on Coltart - which is getting a HUGE high rise at its other end (at Forbes), i hear! Coltart isn't in the cross-hairs, exactly, but with induced traffic, more free-flow traffic (at higher speeds, probably...)...

Why should the homeowner residents in the enclave around Coltart be privileged over the student renter population which is an order of magnitude larger? Or for that matter, the potential new residents who are going to be able to move into the development, or all of the workers who will either be at the new office, benefit from the new multimodal garage, or see their commutes ultimately made easier?

Originally Posted by szug-bot

has there been an actual announcement of this? if eschaton reads this - how are you privy to this???? Are you kevin acklin???????

It was covered by a local website which I linked to on the first page of this thread.

[SolitaryThrush]

Originally Posted by bradjl2009

I can see the potential in those homes as well, but like you said, the chances of that happening in Oakland are very low. Oakland is the third largest business district in the state so seeing those replaced with this project doesn't really bother me too much.

Those actually don't look that bad, but it's an urban neighborhood in need of new housing, new construction, and density. The time to salvage those homes has long passed. Most of the houses in the area have been remuddled and are quite ugly. I look forward to seeing that eyesore cleaned up.

[szug-bot]

Why should the homeowner residents in the enclave around Coltart be privileged over the student renter population which is an order of magnitude larger? Or for that matter, the potential new residents who are going to be able to move into the development, or all of the workers who will either be at the new office, benefit from the new multimodal garage, or see their commutes ultimately made easier?



great to cut/paste the next time someone drags up the Civic Arena.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

great to cut/paste the next time someone drags up the Civic Arena.

How do you think they are analogous in any way whatsoever? The Civic Arena resulted in the displacement of 8,000 residents from the Lower Hill through eminent domain. Some residents will undoubtedly be displaced from this project, but they're almost certainly overwhelmingly student renters (the article mentions the developers have 219 properties under contract, only 11 homeowner occupied). One holdout has said he was threatened with eminent domain, but so far all of the agreements have been voluntary.

Even worse, you were not worried about the people already living in this area being displaced, you were worried about a few dozen homeowners on nearby Coltart Street being possibly inconvenienced, which in no way whatsoever is comparable.

[svband76]

This is DOA hopefully. Anything including the word "demolishing" should be snuffed out. Peduto's favorite word though. Horrible.