Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yep, all that parking and still 'not enough parking.' Really a shame. Or is enough parking but then there's too much traffic. I forget. But either way, it a shame they haven't invented some sort of way to move people around, sort of like a bus, but not a bus, because those are for poors. Maybe if we spread things out we'll be able to scale up that kind of service. Until then, I guess we'll have to leave our city to the lowest land value uses. Maybe one day we can fill it all up with free parking and pickup trucks, but not too full, because then there'd be no room for my pickup truck. Regardless, I'm sure if we build some more office parks off 376 it will fix it all.
Yep, all that parking and still 'not enough parking.' Really a shame. Or is enough parking but then there's too much traffic. I forget. But either way, it a shame they haven't invented some sort of way to move people around, sort of like a bus, but not a bus, because those are for poors. Maybe if we spread things out we'll be able to scale up that kind of service. Until then, I guess we'll have to leave our city to the lowest land value uses. Maybe one day we can fill it all up with free parking and pickup trucks, but not too full, because then there'd be no room for my pickup truck. Regardless, I'm sure if we build some more office parks off 376 it will fix it all.
To be fair, Buncher has plans now to fill in all of that with office space and residential. Although the master plan indicates it's still going to be kinda office-parkish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyovan4
SSW? I thought that SSW was basically dying?
Not so much dying as a bad business mix. The developers went for a very last-century model, with destination retail playing an important role. With the collapse of chain retail nationwide much of the space is vacant, as is a lot of the garage space. This has resulting in financial issues for the holding company, which has made it hard to get the capital to develop the remaining vacant parcels (four IIRC). But the newer apartments have been leasing well, and the waterfront has been a success. I'm confident it's going to fill out completely in the next decade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyovan4
Personally, I would rather have investments in public transit making it easier to reach those new 'hubs' from the suburbs. The infrastructure here is crumbling and is at capacity. Try to drive over the Veterans Bridge or the 31st St Bridge during evening rush hour.
Instead, the plan is for the Bus Rapid Transit between downtown and Oakland. Which feels once again, like the only priority is on the East End Centre of the Universe.
Veterans Bridge is already an absolute nightmare. 31st St Bridge is becoming worse and worse everyday.
But the future will see the Civic Arena site eventually redeveloped, to bring more people there. The Strip is going to continue to be redeveloped and bring more people there.
Everything is about development within the City, everything is about transit within the City.
There's 1.23 million people within Allegheny County. Only 304,000 people live in the City of Pittsburgh. 3/4 of the County lives in the evil, horrible, soul-less, leeching suburbs. But everything is about the people living in a handful of neighborhoods within the City. It gets frustrating.
Again, multinodal systems are just bad for transit. Not just mass transit - even car transit. As an example, look at northern New Jersey. Every little town in that area decided that it wanted to have its own areas of office/industrial parks - largely because non-residential property owners contribute a lot in taxes but don't consume public services the same way residents do. But as a result, there is simply gridlock everywhere in rush hour, as everybody has a different point A and point B. Whereas if instead you had a system where there was an "Office Park borough" with most of the jobs, you could concentrate on widening roads, increasing transit access, etc to and from that one location.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyovan4
Well, that is the third option: not trying to cram everything into a handful of certain neighborhoods: Downtown, Oakland, Strip, E Liberty.
The redevelopment of the Strip seems as if its only going to continue. Especially as that was one of the neighborhoods pimped to Peduto's Lord and Savior: Jeff Bezos.
Something has to give. Infrastructure needs to be improved. (inbound traffic on the 31st St Bridge during evening rush hour is MINISCULE - why not have the bridge be inbound-only during the morning and outbound-only in the evening? 40th St Bridge already has a similar variable set-up for its 3rd lane). Or public transit for the suburbs needs to be improved, to actually make that a viable option to get suburban commuters out of cars and onto buses.
Those are two options, if development is to continue within the Most Holy Pure and Progressive City of Pittsburgh.
The obvious third way alternative is to encourage more development to take place outside of City limits.
I'd argue we have growing suburban office nodes - just not in Allegheny County. They are Cranberry and Southpointe. But the fact that Pittsburgh never built a beltway makes cross-suburban commutes particularly bad in this region. It was great for Downtown Pittsburgh - it's probably part of what saved the vitality of the CBD. But it also meant we never developed the "office park culture" you see in other parts of the country.
Yep, all that parking and still 'not enough parking.' Really a shame. Or is enough parking but then there's too much traffic. I forget. But either way, it a shame they haven't invented some sort of way to move people around, sort of like a bus, but not a bus, because those are for poors. Maybe if we spread things out we'll be able to scale up that kind of service. Until then, I guess we'll have to leave our city to the lowest land value uses. Maybe one day we can fill it all up with free parking and pickup trucks, but not too full, because then there'd be no room for my pickup truck. Regardless, I'm sure if we build some more office parks off 376 it will fix it all.
How does one haul/park a boat, pull a trailer, camper, etc..., without a pickup truck or SUV? How does one plow roads, landscape, plumbing, building, etc..., without owning a large van or pickup truck and trailer to haul supplies and perform work in areas without parking? Taking the bus or owning a small vehicle simply doesn’t work for everyone and not everyone has the same lifestyle to take public transportation all the time.
How does one haul/park a boat, pull a trailer, camper, etc..., without a pickup truck or SUV? How does one plow roads, landscape, plumbing, building, etc..., without owning a large van or pickup truck and trailer to haul supplies and perform work in areas without parking? Taking the bus or owning a small vehicle simply doesn’t work for everyone and not everyone has the same lifestyle to take public transportation all the time.
You parking a camper in the city often? Are we parking a lot of snow plows in the strip these days? Did we ban them from our roads when I wasn't looking? I'm not against parking, but free parking is a handout, using expensive land for low value. City needs to prioritize. "Run like a business" and so forth. Get a lot more value developing that kind of land, and facilitating job centers for people not miles and miles from home, closer to where more people live, not making personal vehicles an outright requirement just to get to work and then complaining about the outcome. Nevermind hauling recreational vehicles, no one is stopping that, just use your own land for storage, or pay a market rate to park it. Stop expecting everybody else to subsidize your vehicle storage through public policy. Personal vehicle usage doesn't scale well anyway, which is exactly why we end up with these conversations about parking, traffic, etc.
I have a friend who works at Phillips in Murrysville, lives in Monroeville, and is more than pumped that they are moving to Bakery Square so that he can be located in an area that feels more alive and has things to do at lunch and right after work. His wife is excited too since by the time the building is up their youngest will be 3, and she can get an afternoon babysitter and meet him for happy hour somewhere other than Buffalo Wild Wings.
You parking a camper in the city often? Are we parking a lot of snow plows in the strip these days? Did we ban them from our roads when I wasn't looking? I'm not against parking, but free parking is a handout, using expensive land for low value. City needs to prioritize. "Run like a business" and so forth. Get a lot more value developing that kind of land, and facilitating job centers for people not miles and miles from home, closer to where more people live, not making personal vehicles an outright requirement just to get to work and then complaining about the outcome. Nevermind hauling recreational vehicles, no one is stopping that, just use your own land for storage, or pay a market rate to park it. Stop expecting everybody else to subsidize your vehicle storage through public policy. Personal vehicle usage doesn't scale well anyway, which is exactly why we end up with these conversations about parking, traffic, etc.
You’re the one that’s bringing up and having a problem with pickup trucks, and I never said anything about parking trailers or a lot of snow plows in the strip. I’m simply giving examples of why many people own pickup trucks. Not everyone shares the same lifestyle, hence different needs...and I’m in favor of paying for parking in the city. I’d much rather pay for my vehicle to be safe in a lot or garage.
You’re the one that’s bringing up and having a problem with pickup trucks, and I never said anything about parking trailers or a lot of snow plows in the strip. I’m simply giving examples of why many people own pickup trucks. Not everyone shares the same lifestyle, hence different needs...and I’m in favor of paying for parking in the city. I’d much rather pay for my vehicle to be safe in a lot or garage.
I don't care about pickup trucks. I have a pickup truck. The main complaint expressed in this thread was about how places like the strip don't have sufficient parking, and how suburban job centers are better this way. Strip has tons of parking, its just not free, and a lot being privately owned, tends to be pretty close to market rate (generally meaning a price that mostly fills up the lot, but facilitiates availability - full lots are underpriced says the market). Anyway, its free parking advocacy, parking mins and related policy arguments I have issue with, not trucks. It doesn't sound like we have a disagreement on that.
I don't care about pickup trucks. I have a pickup truck. The main complaint expressed in this thread was about how places like the strip don't have sufficient parking, and how suburban job centers are better this way. Strip has tons of parking, its just not free, and a lot being privately owned, tends to be pretty close to market rate (generally meaning a price that mostly fills up the lot, but facilitiates availability - full lots are underpriced says the market). Anyway, its free parking advocacy, parking mins and related policy arguments I have issue with, not trucks. It doesn't sound like we have a disagreement on that.
You brought up pickup trucks, I simply explained why many people own them.
I agree with parking. I have zero problem with paying for parking.
You parking a camper in the city often? Are we parking a lot of snow plows in the strip these days? Did we ban them from our roads when I wasn't looking? I'm not against parking, but free parking is a handout, using expensive land for low value. City needs to prioritize. "Run like a business" and so forth. Get a lot more value developing that kind of land, and facilitating job centers for people not miles and miles from home, closer to where more people live, not making personal vehicles an outright requirement just to get to work and then complaining about the outcome. Nevermind hauling recreational vehicles, no one is stopping that, just use your own land for storage, or pay a market rate to park it. Stop expecting everybody else to subsidize your vehicle storage through public policy. Personal vehicle usage doesn't scale well anyway, which is exactly why we end up with these conversations about parking, traffic, etc.
you are attacking a strawman. nobody is asking for parking to be free. they were comparing the cost that employees would have to pay for parking now and asking if they would be compensated with additional wages now. parking could also be substituted for transit costs, etc.,as employees could have to pay more even if they don't drive.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
