Progress Pittsburgh

A timely topic, as energy becomes a sharper issue for the American public and we watch changes in consumer behavior hash out against a backdrop of slow-to-change and often contradictory public policy. Will there be any long-term impact on where people choose to live? Well, this index is a project of The Urban Markets Initiative (Brookings). tune in to the KnowledgePlex “Expert Chat” at 2 pm on Thursday to learn more. Btw, the expert chats that I’ve listened to have been really interesting if you like these kinds of topics – older ones are archived on the same link.

A new blockwatch network called Pittsburgh Safe Neighborhoods Network has kicked off and started a blog where materials are available and they’re encouraging block watch folks to share information.

CityLIVE! Series
Getting There… from Here: Transportation Solutions for Our Region
Speaker: Sanjeev Shah, Steven Bland, Chelsa Wagner
New Hazlett Theater
July 24, 2008 6:30 p.m.

Is the auto the most convenient and efficient way to move people around our region? Can new technologies and policies help unite the region and contribute to our urban vitality? Can we use transportation to grow the city, and the region, in the right way?

The Pittsburgh region is ripe for innovation. New technologies present exciting opportunities to move people and goods around more efficiently than ever before. Light rail, extensive riverfront trails, an efficient bus system, car sharing are all heading in the right direction. But that’s just a start. Getting it “right” requires creative planning.

Join us for a charged discussion on how to get from here … to there.

And as a bonus, because we believe that everyone should have a hand in the planning process, we’ll unveil a project which will allow everyone in the region to have a voice in the role of land use and transportation planning, whether you are an urban planner, environmentalist, architect, policy maker, transportation expert, biker, boater or skater.

Get going …. get involved! rsvp@citylive.org

Monday, December 10th
12:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Xplorion Lobby, Regional Enterprise Tower (Old Alcoa Building)
425 Sixth Avenue, Downtown Pgh
For more information, please call (412) 391‐5590 or visit www.projectregion.org.

If you can’t make it to the open house, you can read the plan document and comment on it at the website linked above.

If you care about the implementation of the regional plan, want to give the SPC suggestions and ask some tough questions, attend this open house or read the plan online. The Regional Plan’s implementation, as well as the final results of the planning process, “Project Region,” are being showcased at this open house. There are a lot of good and reasonable goals and principles set forth in the plan, but now it’s time to see if they can be put into practice – and where future land use and development of our region is the context, you know that’s going to be a challenge. The Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission, the “metropolitan planning organization” for our region, is the conduit for most transportation dollars that come to us. It has been in charge of the whole process of developing this plan, which included public participation in ranking a spectrum of future development scenarios. The plan development process was lauded as one of the best-designed in the nation.

There have been at least a couple of news articles in the last month or more since the subprime market crash, reporting that the Pittsburgh region has escaped the kind of trauma and sharply declining home prices that have hit other regions hard. According to an article in the Trib, analysts from PNC Financial found that home price appreciation was actually higher in our region than the national average during some parts of this year. Of course, they attribute the much less precipitous fall to our region’s lack of population growth – well, I guess it is clear that the higher you climb the harder you fall. Perhaps this situation highlights the risks inherent in a speculative market, or greed, or lack of government regulation. I would like the main focus not to be on the fact that Pittsburgh sat out a historic rise and fall, but on the fact that we have plenty of subprime lending in this region (and there have been news articles covering the worst hardships that befall some borrowers). After all, isn’t that what caused the crash in the first place – not enough people could pay back the subprime loans (with high interest rates and burdensome debt to income ratios) on time.
More »

Anyone attend and like to comment on the highlights?
Apparently Pittsburgh has received 2.5 million dollars from Surdna to bring people back to city neighborhoods. Surdna’s 2007 grantees are listed, several Pittsburgh orgs among them, but I couldn’t find this particular grant – or on the web in general.
Conference coverage here…

It is about time Pittsburgh police procedures catch up with what other cities are doing. This article states that Police Chief Harper “is updating the bureau’s policies regarding officer-involved domestic disputes. One of the changes he plans is to authorize an ‘administrative investigation’ of all domestic violence incidents.” The article does not indicate whether or not a decision has been made to take away officers guns and/or place them on “desk duty” or “paid leave” pending the results of such an administrative investigation, all policies used by other cities. Does anyone know what measures are being agreed to other than the administrative investigation? Of course, none of these departmental policies does much in the long term to protect the women accusing the officers of abuse, which is the ultimate concern, but at least they would offer a measure of immediate protection and send a message that officers of the law are expected to maintain certain standards of conduct and display character that makes them worthy of the public’s trust.
More »

Housing makes up, for many people, the largest chunk of the monthly budget. We are advised to spend no more than 30 percent of our incomes on housing, but many around the country have no choice but to spend more. If I was a single person, bringing home $25,000 per year, I should spend no more than $695 on monthly rent to be able to meet my other monthly expenses (hopefully, I have health insurance). Living in Pittsburgh, I would have no trouble finding such an apartment. In fact, I wouldn’t have much trouble paying a mortgage.

A transplant to Pittsburgh myself, I often reflect that I would be paying the same amount for a two-bedroom apartment in my former life as I am for my mortgage now. I have always seen Pittsburgh’s moderate cost of living – largely due to the low to moderate cost of housing – as one of its great assets. At the same time, I realize that much of that cost-of-housing difference is due to Pittsburgh’s economic downturn. I think one of the most important planning efforts our City must undertake in the near future is to prepare for the hoped-for future success of a better job market that will attract population and increase our tax base. If our City’s small successes in attracting new businesses continue to rack up and our population grows enough, so housing costs will inevitably rise. Young working professionals will do just fine, and newcomers will add to the already substantial middle class here in Pittsburgh. My worry is around those who will be left out of any growth in good high-tech or retail headquarters positions. We should start creating an affordable housing plan now while growth is still slow and we have time to steer and prepare for the consequences of success. We have already seen change over a decade or so in a handful of our neighborhoods. More »

Yes, the first national conference focused on reuse of vacant properties is happening right here in Pittsburgh on Sept. 24 and 25, 2007.

The National Vacant Properties Campaign is the sponsor of the conference “Reclaiming Vacant Properties,” along with several national and local entities.

The conference website indicates that web registration is open until 9/14. The fee for students is $75 and for members of the nonprofit and public sectors $325 for the two-day conference.

The conference must be tainted with a great deal of sadness for the people involved in it, as Adriane Aul, who recently passed away, was on the host committee and did a great deal of work on this issue as coordinator of the Vacant Properties Working Group with PCRG, as a City employee, and I believe nationally as well.

A+ Schools has organized a series of community forums on issues of interest to parents and the general community interested in Pittsburgh Public Schools policy.

They take place on 9/18 and 20, 10/11 and 11/27 evenings.

RSVP is requested and space is limited so check the A+ website to sign up and for more information. Childcare is provided at all the sessions for children at least 1 year old.

Topics range from development of a new school at the former Reizenstein (Science and Tech); options for parents enrolling children in magnet schools, kindergarten or pre-K; parental involvement; student safety and discipline.

Pittsburgh Climate Protection Initiative
Sept. 12
St. Mark’s Evangelical Lutheran Church
933 Brookline Blvd., Brookline
6:00 – 7:30 pm

Sept. 11
Trinity Cathedral, 325 Oliver Ave., Downtown
6:00 – 7:30 pm

Pittsburgh Climate Protection Initiative’s mission is to reduce local CO2 Emissions. Visit www.PittsburghClimate.org for more information.

A report on the recommendations made at all the town-hall meetings will be incorporated into a draft local action plan, which will be submitted to the Green Government Task Force, led by Mayor Ravenstahl, City Councilman Bill Peduto and State Senator Jim Ferlo. the Green Government Task Force will be responsible for submitting a final draft of the local action plan to Council later in ‘07.

Contact:
Eamon T. Geary
412-431-0709
eamong@gbapgh.org

Media:
Jeff Worden
412-253-0816
Jeff@worden-pr.com

Sept. 11
Trinity Cathedral, 325 Oliver Ave., Downtown
6:00 – 7:30 pm

Pittsburgh Climate Protection Initiative’s mission is to reduce local CO2 Emissions. Visit www.PittsburghClimate.org for more information.

A report on the recommendations made at all the town-hall meetings will be incorporated into a draft local action plan, which will be submitted to the Green Government Task Force, led by Mayor Ravenstahl, City Councilman Bill Peduto and State Senator Jim Ferlo. the Green Government Task Force will be responsible for submitting a final draft of the local action plan to Council later in ‘07.

Contact:
Eamon T. Geary
412-431-0709
eamong@gbapgh.org

Media:
Jeff Worden
412-253-0816
Jeff@worden-pr.com

I attended the Venture Outdoors-sponsored town hall meeting this evening on the proposal for a County-wide riverfront park, which has been championed by County Councilman Dave Fawcett, R-Oakmont. The proposal is now in the form of a bill, sponsored by Fawcett and Jim Burn D-Millvale. See the park map here. I love this idea, and it was wonderful to hear these councilmen (who gave the presentation) talk about the plan for a “green” county and this “linear park” (would be the worlds largest) in terms of real economic development for the region, river/mill towns. Those mentioned, like Sharpsburg and Glassport, bring to mind pictures of abandoned railroad tracks, empty industrial buildings, and a water’s edge that is perhaps littered with refuse. The park would reclaim these strips of land, join them together with multi-use trails, connect community residents to the riverfront through gateways and bridges, and provide boathouses and other amenities. Millvale was given of an example of how riverfront improvement has already been done locally, by purchasing land from the County for $1, and has resulted in reinvestment in the borough’s business district even after Ivan’s flood. I have no doubt that with proper planning, a world-class park like this will contribute to economic development.
There are so many projects and goals that could tie into this, like requiring rehab of riverfront property to meet LEED standards and dovetailing with plans to make our region a center for “green industry.”
However, we all know what other project is described by many public officials as a boon for economic development: the Mon-Fayette Toll Road. The road is being sold to local officials in the Mon Valley as just that, and many are convinced by the arguement.
In fact, the Mon-Fayette would run along right next to parts of the proposed County-wide Park, making a physical as well as a philosophical contradiction to the type of development and type of vision the park represents. My question to Fawcett and Burn is, what are they going to do about it? County Exec. Onorato supports the Mon-Fayette and many mayors and borough concilors do as well. I would love to hear that Burn (as a former mayer of Millvale) and Fawcett plan to talk with these mayors and show them what concrete economic benefits came to Millvale when it improved its waterfront and convince them that the MFX is the wrong path (a wide, dirty, congested, expensive path).
Bottom line, cost of the park: 100 M was quoted at the presentation this evening.
Sounds pretty good compared with the price tag of the MFX, plus we won’t have to breathe as much pollution while enjoying our park.
To the argument that people need to be able to travel through the region to get to jobs, etc. I’m not saying that a linear park will solve all of our conjestion problems, but it does open up possiblities for people to travel, to work or wherever, differently. Neither would the MFX solve our conjestion problems. Roads breed more cars and conjestion (I forget where I read that new roads only ever attract more cars and then have to get wider and wider to accomodate more cars.)

I attended the Venture Outdoors-sponsored town hall meeting this evening on the proposal for a County-wide riverfront park, which has been championed by County Councilman Dave Fawcett, R-Oakmont. The proposal is now in the form of a bill, sponsored by Fawcett and Jim Burn D-Millvale. See the park map here. I love this idea, and it was wonderful to hear these councilmen (who gave the presentation) talk about the plan for a “green” county and this “linear park” (would be the worlds largest) in terms of real economic development for the region, river/mill towns. Those mentioned, like Sharpsburg and Glassport, bring to mind pictures of abandoned railroad tracks, empty industrial buildings, and a water’s edge that is perhaps littered with refuse. The park would reclaim these strips of land, join them together with multi-use trails, connect community residents to the riverfront through gateways and bridges, and provide boathouses and other amenities. Millvale was given of an example of how riverfront improvement has already been done locally, by purchasing land from the County for $1, and has resulted in reinvestment in the borough’s business district even after Ivan’s flood. I have no doubt that with proper planning, a world-class park like this will contribute to economic development.
There are so many projects and goals that could tie into this, like requiring rehab of riverfront property to meet LEED standards and dovetailing with plans to make our region a center for “green industry.”
However, we all know what other project is described by many public officials as a boon for economic development: the Mon-Fayette Toll Road. The road is being sold to local officials in the Mon Valley as just that, and many are convinced by the arguement.
In fact, the Mon-Fayette would run along right next to parts of the proposed County-wide Park, making a physical as well as a philosophical contradiction to the type of development and type of vision the park represents. My question to Fawcett and Burn is, what are they going to do about it? County Exec. Onorato supports the Mon-Fayette and many mayors and borough concilors do as well. I would love to hear that Burn (as a former mayer of Millvale) and Fawcett plan to talk with these mayors and show them what concrete economic benefits came to Millvale when it improved its waterfront and convince them that the MFX is the wrong path (a wide, dirty, congested, expensive path).
Bottom line, cost of the park: 100 M was quoted at the presentation this evening.
Sounds pretty good compared with the price tag of the MFX, plus we won’t have to breath as much pollution while enjoying our park.
To the argument that people need to be able to travel through the region to get to jobs, etc. I’m not saying that a linear park will solve all of our conjestion problems, but it does open up possiblities for people to travel, to work or wherever, differently. Neither would the MFX solve our conjestion problems. Roads breed more cars and conjestion (I forget where I read that new roads only ever attract more cars and then have to get wider and wider to accomodate more cars.)