Loading ...
Do You REDO?
by 15211Advocate ~ March 5th, 2008. Filed under: Community, Development, MWREDO.The first meeting of the MWREDO has got to be over by now and we wanted to hear about it. So instead of commenting in the post that has over 100 comments I wanted to start a new thread.
Questions I have:
What issues were discussed? Was the turnout good? Does it have longevity?
March 6th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I was very much impressed by how many people want to see the business community of Mt. Washington improved! Now, if we can just make sure that the zoning and city authorities see how much popular support there is for development. I am happy for any ideas to grow exisiting businesses, bring in new businesses, and raise property values and the quality of life for everyone that lives here. I know that a lot fo details have yet to come out, but there is a process for that, and I look forward to seeign th eprocess followed by all participants. No one should be able to essentially veto what would benefit us all for some potential and merely hypothetical harm to someone’s “own” on-street parking space, non-expert opinions of traffic patterns and congestion, or concerns over potential business competition from potential new businesses that might occupy new buildings. We have a view that draws visitors–as long as we have this, let’s offer visitors and residents something else besides the status quo.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Lance:
I too am shocked by the parking argument that developers come up against. A lot of other neighborhoods in Pittsburgh have made it work. Why can’t we?
MG
March 6th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
I heard that during the last city zoning meeting somebody requested permission to convert an old 15211 church into a bar.
Does anyone know the details?
March 6th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
No, but it sounds good to me! Would be great to have something like Church Brew Works up here. Also, I would be careful just saying they want to convert it into a BAR, i’m sure it’s a restaurant that sells alcohol, not a “bar”.
I do know that there is a church being converted into high end condos on Kathleen, again, another great use for an empty building. Kudos to the developers!
I hope the church in question is the one on Bailey Ave. That side of 15211 needs a high end restaurant and that building would be perfect.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Isn’t the Church on Bailey Avenue still in session??
March 6th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
I believe that you’re right, CTRN. From what I understand, they have a rather small congregation, but a congregation nonetheless.
I don’t know that a microbrewery has to be in a church. If it’s a non-typical venue we’re looking for, how about the former BP on Virginia/Wyoming?
MG
March 6th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
If any of you happen to attend the CDC meeting this evening, can you give us a synopsis tomorrow?
We commented on the REDO meeting so it’s only fair to give equal attention to the CDC. I don’t know what’s on the agenda, but I can imagine Virginia zoning will be brought up since the Map Pittsburgh meeting is in two weeks.
Thanks,
MG
March 6th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
MG/CTRN-
From what I understand, there is actually more than one congregation currently using the Bailey Ave church as a meeting place.
15211 advocate–
Not sure why I need to be careful since we don’t know the details — the person that informed me of the zoning request referred to it as a bar, not a “restaurant that sells alcohol”.
March 6th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Bertha St.
I can’t say for sure, but I sense 15211Advocate is being sarcastic due to the stink that was made over Packs and Dogs.
MG
March 6th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
I don’t mind the term either but it seems every time someone mentions “new bar”, everyone freaks out up here and the anti- development people start building up an army of protesters.
Correct terminology seems to be a touchy subject in the 15211. I would like to start referring to bars as restaurants because it isn’t as threatening or demonizing (not that I think they are, but a lot of people up here hate them). Then maybe there won’t be such a bloody uproar every time someone tries to do something positive for the Mount… like convert an old empty almost condemned church into a restaurant.
March 6th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
15211 advocate -
Good point. I’m certainly not anti-development, but I can see how referring to a new restaurant as a bar can be taken the wrong way by someone who is.
MG-
I like the idea of doing something with the old BP station.
March 6th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
MG,
Couldn’t agree more about devoping the old BP gas station. Prime location. Have you been to the Double Wide on the Southside? I had my oil changed there once when it was a service station… now it is a really cool restaurant!
Kim
March 6th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Don’t know the personalities or any of the history involved but it seems as though parking is a legitimate concern as anyone who has lived in the city knows. This issue should be taken seriously and addressed. It brings to mind the following example of a successful community group.
A playground was planned in Baldwin Borough and it sparked some opposition from neighboring homeowners. Their main concern was possible flooding (what some might consider “hypothetical harm”) if the wooded buffer that separated the field from the homes was altered or removed. Other concerns were privacy and noise.
Their concerns were addressed and the plans were reworked to satisfy the neighbors by leaving the existing trees in the wooded buffer and adding more to increase privacy and reduce noise. Also, the existing ditch that caught water run-off was widened and deepened and rerouted into an improved storm drain. The original plan for a three-foot high fence surrounding the playground was also heightened to five foot.
A true concern for all sides ended in a win win situation for all involved and unified the community behind the project.
March 8th, 2008 at 9:09 am
circusvue illustrates a great concept in that last post …the community working together with a developer to make it work for everyone, but the project move forward… and maybe EVERYONE doesnt get EVERYTHING they want, but some of the community needs are met and some of the developers needs are met…
I too am frustrated by the parking complaits although it is a valid concern .,, but here’s my thought …
dont you think these details will be worked out as the project is planned? it seems that someone says “I have an idea about maybe building a…” and before they can finish the sentence, someone chimes in with “have you thought about parking?”
I jokingly picture a builder finishing up a project and then smacking himself in the head when he realizes …oh crap… I just built 20 high end apartments and forgot to think about parking
So without getting too poilical…in a lot of ways these issue can and will be worked out … the free market has a way of working these issues out…
you think someone that buys a 400k town house is going to park on the street!?!?!?!? no way … someone that pays that kind of loot also has a nice car and probably wants secure parking …
just a thought.
March 8th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
There are codes that dictate the number of parking spaces required for a development. It’s not up to the developer to make the decision to include parking.
March 8th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Would you please post the details (where & when) of the next MWRedo meetings?
Love the Packs and Dogs idea. I, too, enjoy Dee’s Six Pack & Dogs and all of Regent Square! Kudo’s to a great idea for an updated family-priced, casual(but NOT low quality) restaurant idea..
Hopefully, as the price of gas increases, the number of cars will also decrease and folks won’t stop development because they need 4 or 5 personal parking spaces, immediately in front of their houses! Good grief this park space issue bores me-I used to live in NYC.
BTW-Lots of MW & DH streets have alleys with garages in back. Does anyone lucky enough to live on such well-planned street/alley configurations, actually use these garages for their cars?
The people who are FOR development and neighborhood improvement projects that serve the needs of this changing neighborhood, have got to get out to the community meetings, forums and public hearings. The naysayers always show up…
Thanks everybody for your postings and thank-you MountainGirl for hosting this forum.
March 8th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
All:
Your thoughts on the parking issue are all valid, but they are also very rational and I think that the anti-development side of this argument is operating strictly on emotion.
Concerns about parking are a guise for whatever fear they have about what new condos, bookstores, boutiques, etc would bring to Mt. Washington.
MG
March 8th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Well put MG….
March 9th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
I think the South Side has a much larger parking issue than Mount Washington but that hasn’t held them back from development…
I think this will be resolved if given the chance.
March 11th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
A check with the South Side Local Development Company reveals there are 4 public parking garages with a total of 2,000 spaces and 5 public parking lots with a total of 240 spaces for a grand total of 2,240 public parking spaces. These figures do not include Station Square-only the South Side all the way to the South Side Works.
Does anyone have any idea how many public parking spaces Mt. Washington (including Duquesne Heights) has?
March 11th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
The city is doing the right thing by recommending that both sides of Virginia ave be rezoned. This will allow for more than ample parking for any development that would take place in the future. Seeing that most of the lots on the north side of Virginia are double lots & could be attached to the bottom half of the parking garage that is never more than a quarter full. Lets face it parking just isn’t an issue anymore, at least pertaining to development on Virginia ave. Now that we are not talking about a single lot anymore, but the 100 block of Virginia ave as a whole.
March 11th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Thanks Chuck and circusvue for the informaton!
When I was talking about South Side I was referring to the home owners/renters in the historic district. The public spaces are paid spaces…with pay booths (i.e. the one on 18th behind Bruegger’s).
I wonder if the plans include something similar for public parking.
March 11th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
my neighbar attended teh REDO meeting and told me taht the guy who sells ice cream on Shiloh Street was against some of the suggested development. did anybody hear about this? I heard that he was very angry at the thoughtt that other busineses might come into the community and also sell ice cream.
sometimes it seems to me that many people in teh community are hiding behind the no-parking arguement and that the reality is that they dont’ want anyone coming in to compete against their businesses.
March 12th, 2008 at 10:56 am
I can see why Mr. Todd (the guy that sells ice cream) would oppose any sort of competition. He certainly has a right to voice his opinion and to protest his business. (BTW - they make pretty good sandwiches up there if you have never been)
However, I doubt we will see a flood of ice cream shops taking over Shiloh street just because we encourage small business development. Besides, he already has the best location, and with that comes first shot at any potential customers should an ice cream shop war break out.
If anything, an improved business district will only increase the flow of customers walking into his ice cream shop (or his adjacent coffee shop, http://www.popcitymedia.com/developmentnews/42grndbrew.aspx )
March 12th, 2008 at 11:05 am
Obviously I mean protect his business, not protest his business.
Although, maybe that was a freudian slip when you consider our neighbors who do, in fact, protest any kind of new business.
March 12th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Bertha St:
Free speech is a beautiful thing–so yes, a businessperson does have every right to voice his/her opinion when it comes to development. However, I don’t know that fear of competition is a legitimate reason to oppose it.
You’re right though. An increase in foot traffic anywhere in our business district will increase the customer base of existing businesses.
MG