Outside Erie

24 Responses to “Comment of the Week — Improving Tullio Arena”

1. Mike
   June 27th, 2008 at 11:36 am

   People in Erie are becoming like Red Sox fans prior to 2004 in regards to these public projects. Because they kept losing year after year, often in spectacular fashion, Red Sox fans, even when the team was winning, expected them to ultimately fail in the end, and even seemed to revel in the misery.

   These public projects in Erie are much the same as the Red Sox. They may start out with some promise, but eventually cost a large amount to the public with little in return. It has gotten to the point where many Erie citizens expect failure based on what as happened time and time again in the past. Even the post here ends with the word “Again”.

   The good news is that the Sox have since won 2 World Series. Maybe Erie will eventually get it right, but I don’t think it is wise to throw bad money after bad money as far as the Tullio Center goes.

2. George Vietze
   June 27th, 2008 at 12:07 pm

   The State of Pa. being the owner of the Tullio Center certainly has the right to maintain and upgrade its own building. The fact that the County Executive and Jane Earll are trying to bring together a coalition of support is encouraging and looks as if a more comprehensive look or a more regionized approached to thinking may be trying to come together.

   I am just suggesting that you may be correct in your view, instead of spending a huge amount of money to redo a facility that may be inadequate based upon the potential of the future of the erea, maybe a more comprehensive analysis and planning could come up with a plan that would include the proper mix of uses that would contribute to the highest and best use based upon a more current feasibility analysis rather than just remodel an outdated facility. If an objective study determines that a larger more state of the art facility is what is needed.

   If the combined goals of the City of Erie, Port Authority, Erie County and the State of Pa. could work together for the benefit of the total community in a more cohesive manner and make those plans public
   it could contribute to a better marketing plan for interested parties to become aware of and our representatives such as the Chamber of Commerce and the new Manufactures Association and others, to know what to market and include in their marketing efforts.

   I noticed in the paper that a California developer is making progress purchasing the yacht club on the Bayfront. It does not take an exceptional amount of vision to understand that their is considerable potential in the Bayfront property. If the goals and objectives of the Bayfront Authority and the City of Erie were known to the public it would be easier for out of state interests to understand what we are trying to market or if you are trying to market anything. Maybe local people understand that the Tullio Center is owned by the State of Pa. and that the City owns some of the land and the Port Authority controls the Bayfront property. It would be helpful for interested parties to know what those separate interests are and what their goals are, if any.

   Maybe someone could explain why the Convention Center and Hotel stands alone without surrounding mixed uses planned to create the synergy necessary for its success. I would understand better, if someone would say Phase I includes the Convention Center and Hotel and that Phase II, III or whatever are planned to support that facility.
   I would at least understand if the answer was that the Bayfront Authority is negotiating with the GAF people for that property and it might not be in their interest to expose a total plan at this time, fearing that might raise the price, at least that has a basis in reason.

   I am just trying to suggest a more comprehensive view of the interested parties working together on a comprehensive planning
   program viewing the long term effects in a more efficient manner creating a better end result for all.

3. MGR
   June 27th, 2008 at 2:33 pm

   Actually I believe there is a firm that may buy the Bay Harbor Marina, not one of the 2 yacht clubs along the bayfront. I must note that this transaction will definitely not be open to the public because they are John Britton’s properties by lease and improvements. The Port Authority can approve or deny the transfer, but they aren’t in charge of development plans there. In my opinion, a sale would likely be beneficial. We would continue to have a a strong operator for those facilities and John would free up some capital probably to engage in more development.

   As far as the Civic Center goes, I would say patch and roll for now, rebuild and expand later. In all honesty, we don’t ned to spend a bunch of tax money right now for a marginal benefit. that the overhaul down there would provide. If we must spend a chunk of tax dollars on a brick and mortar project, and I don’t think we should, we would be better off to fund a Peach and French Street Overhaul or fund some of the redevelopment authority’s current plans.

4. MGR
   June 27th, 2008 at 3:13 pm

   By the way, I am not saying the Port Authority shouldn’t have a general plan or that it shouldn’t be public, but I doubt there are many provisions in the referenced lease to make changes without the developer’s and port’s joint agreement.

5. Jim
   June 27th, 2008 at 3:54 pm

   I have yet to completely make up my mind about the port authority. On the one hand they have been the driving force behind the bay front development, if one calls it that, while the city essentially watched for want of resources. On the other hand, it left the development to individual and un-coordinated projects that have not provided the necessary synergy to allow various venues to meet their pre-construction stated potential.

   Another concern I have is that the current arrangement has too many decision makers involved in arriving at a cost effective development plan. As MGR has pointed out, much of what is down there would require a developers and port authority approval to move forward, assuming the city didn’t stand in the way through zoning or other restrictions. With our track record, I believe the more hands involved in the decision, the less attractive it is to most private developers, especially those aware of the problems between the convention center authority and Nick Scott. As a result we get left with primarily public sector development, like the convention center, hotel, Liberty Park, while at the same time the few private ventures under perform.

   Whether the GAF properties will eventually help to correct the situation remains to be seen, but without it, the convention center will be hard pressed to meet or maintain its potential. As I mentioned on Dale’s site, I believe we could have done a much better job of creating a destination by putting the Tullio Center, ball field, convention center and hotel in close proximity to the Warner, then ringing that district with supportive commercial development. But it would have required a much bigger footprint than was made available, and even the scaled down scope had to undergo cuts due to budget issues. Part of that problem was the lack of involvement of the county at the time, and the well documented problems of city development over decades.

   A reasonable person could ask why the state, holding title to an asset, sits by allowing it to deteriorate to the point of requiring such a major infusion of cash, which would not allow the facility to reach potentials talked about two and a half decades ago. You would think the state would have been interested in at least adequate maintenance of their asset without the need to get our political ducks in a row.

6. George Vietze
   June 27th, 2008 at 6:33 pm

   Would anyone be willing to explain the Bayfront Port Authority and whether they are a State sponsored authority or an automous entity
   owned or directed by the city or county. It is interesting that certain buildings are State owned like theTulio Center and I assume the ball park and connecting facilities are also State owned? Are the libraries
   City owned? Is the Warner another State owned building? What other major downtown or midtown facilities are not owned by the City?
   This may help explain why it is difficult to come up with any sort of a plan that includes all the facilities in the area considering the fractured ownership and management objectives? Sorry for being such a “newby” but I would appreciate the background.

7. MGR
   June 27th, 2008 at 7:03 pm

   Well don’t feel bad for not knowing, I grew up here and am pretty well informed, but I would be hard pressed to actually tell you who owns what and who doesn’t regarding a lot of public venues. I believe state ownership is an anomoly outside of the usual state buildings/offices, but there are all sorts of pseudo-governmental bodies and “authorities”, plus cooperative and non-profit groups that have ownership stakes in addition to the city, county, etc.

8. Erie BlogWatch
   June 28th, 2008 at 6:46 pm

   Computer scientists working in the area of security frequently refer to this as “security through obscurity”.

   While it is not a particularly desirable attribute in their field of endeavor, it certainly seems to be achieving its goals quite nicely in terms of Erieland public policy. And don’t for one minute think that is not by design.

   There is more inbreeding and incest in all these governmental agencies and authorities than in most royal families.

   Exposing all of this in understandable terms would make a great series of articles for the ETN or sweeps week stories for local TV news but I fear the body politic is more fascinated in Brittany’s latest antics or which area restaurant was found by the Health Dept. to have a housefly in its horseradish.

9. john morris
   June 28th, 2008 at 7:57 pm

   The nice thing is we might get to find out which agency owns what when they default on their bonds. It seems like shell games like that are mostly about cooking the books and avoiding direct responsibility.

10. john morris
    June 28th, 2008 at 8:25 pm

    George, I can’t help feeling the problem is deeper than you think and might have to do with the wisdom of the projects from the start.

    Large facilities that are relatively rarely filled represent detractions from potential development. Most of these places sit pretty empty a good deal of the time during which they act as holes and gaps in the potential urban fabric. Even worse, if the city itself lacks a good transit system to support them, then they require even larger holes to provide parking, either as very vast surface lots or as smaller but very expensive parking garages. (underground parking is insanely expensive)They also cause huge peak load issues for roadways.

    While there are occasional succes stories such as Madison Square Garden or Chicago’s Wrigley Field, most often it’s a case of stadium that is succesful because of the area it’s in rather than the other way around.

    People always hype the value of these places when they are full or during high profile events but few look at the impact when they are empty– which is most of the time.

    Pittsburgh, I think serves as a good reminder of the negative impact facilities like this can have when they are stacked together to create huge gaps in the city. Federal street’s shopping district which is right next to PNC Park and close to Heinz Field barely supports a small number of sports bars. The area also ends up with very heavy peak load traffic issues on it’s roads which inhibit further development and generally create noise and other issues which make all the areas near the stadiums unattracive for residents or offices– (as in actual city taxpayers)

    In fact, in spite or because of these facilities, Pittsburgh’s entire North Side really only supports one supermarket and no fully funtional shopping distrct. It’s also highly likely that the large gaps caused by the stadiums and their parking lots have helped weaken development potential in downtown Pittsburgh.

    There isn’t any one rule, but generally sprinkling large infrequently used facilities around a town is wiser than throwing them together.

11. john morris
    June 28th, 2008 at 8:42 pm

    Comparing Pittsburgh’s North Side to other areas in the city is highly instrucive. The North Side contains these key city sports, cultural and entertainment facilities.

    Heinz Field — home of the Pittsburgh Steelers
    PNC Park home of the pirates and concidered on MLB’s finest parks
    The Carnegie Science Center– major science museum
    The Pittsburgh Children’s Museum
    The Andy Warhol Museum– the world’s best collection of his work
    The Mattress Factory– an internationally known center for instalation art.

    It’s also generally, one of the cities most empty and often depressed areas. If one compares this to Pittsburgh’s South Side which ahs almost no assets of this kind but is one of it’s most vibrant and consitantly stable bausiness and shopping areas, you have to wonder what’s going on.

12. George Vietze
    June 29th, 2008 at 4:28 am

    John, you raise excellent questions concerning the size, frequency, parking requirements, types of mixed uses and the economic feasibility and the capital requirements of sports/entertainment uses and the synergy they create for any given area.

    These are some of the components that are considered in a comprehensive study/analysis to determine what uses are appropriate
    for any given area based upon the demographics of that area, whether we be talking about the Pittsburg area or the Erie area.

    I am starting to understand the difference between Erie and some of the other areas I am familiar with,tryiing to acertain why the Erie area with so many assets and demographics has not grown and developed to its potential.

    I joined this forum to try to get some background information from as many sources as I could to help acertain the political and other history
    that would shed light on that subject. I was visiting my son, who had moved to Erie prior to the time the Casino/race track was trying to determine whether it could get approval to invest $250 million or so in the Erie area. I had a reason to focus on the potential of the area because the price of the land and real estate seemed attractive relative to the potential of the area. I downloaded the ECONOMIC FEASSIBILITY ANALYSIS STUDY that the Casino/race track provided the State of Pa. and Erie and anyone who cared to find a reason to be concerned about why someone would invest that much money and chose Erie, Pa. for its location.

    My educational background is accounting and finance from Bentley College in Massachusetts but my business background is real estate development. Before companies or individuals make a determination to invest their time and money they usually perform or require some sort of a report, study, research to support and justify that investment of both their time and money, both for their own purposes and sometimes it is a requirement of any lending or financial institutions that are funding the money for the project.

    That Economic Feasibiliy Study opened my eyes to the future potential of the Erie area. I was planning retirement at that time and the opportunity to invest and live in Erie area represented to me the kind of life style I preferred at a price that was a fraction of what a similar lifestyle would be, although it required a certain flexibility in the winter months. I found an opportunity to purchase 200 acres of land within 15 minutes of the casino/racetrack and two miles from the Erie City limits
    at a price less than I would have to pay for a 2 bedroom condo in San Diego.

    I had done my research and made my investment in the lifestyle I preferred, the question them became how do I market my project and convince other people to move to the area. My reseach also included speaking to as many local people about why this area with so many obvious assets and demographics was so undeveloped, there had to be underlying reasons. As usual, a good portion of the information pointed to the fractured politial situaltion and the exit of a significant portion of the manufacturing base that once was a major part of the areas economy. One of the other factors was the lack of a comprehensive marketing effort by the municipalities and the representatives.

    In order to market any project or product someone has to put together a marketing package or presentation that includes not only what is for sale by why someone should purchase of invest in that product, development or area. That usually includes a description of the project, supporting data and analysis of economic feasibility, cost, projections and other information.

    Realizing that the driver of that engine includes the viability of the City of Erie and its attractions it becomes important to look at the area as a whole rather than focus on the separate components that make up the sum of the parts. The City of Erie, Erie County and surrounding townships all depend upon each other for their success whether they like to believe that or not, if no one wants to live in the City of Erie and the City is not viable, less people will want to live in the surrounding areas be that the adjacent residential communities next to downtown or midtown or further into the townships, the success of the City of Erie
    benefits everybody, all the way to and including the State of Pa., that now has even more a stake because it has chosen Erie as the place for its premier gambling casino that currently generates millions of dollars on a weekly basis.

    Wether we believe it or not we all are in the game together. The question them becomes how does a community with so many fractured interests, both politically and demographically come together with a MARKETING PACKAGE with supporting data and effectively market that information?

    That answer is challenging but a number of interested parties have seen the potential of the area, which includes, as one of the most important ingredients, creditable and concerned residents of the area with a desire to come together for the benefit of the entire community including State of Pa, County officials, township people and City residents to form a plan to embrace these concerns.

    Many groups that include the Chamber of Commerce, the new Manufactures and Business Association, Young Erie Profressionals,
    Roar on the Shore, many other people including our educational facilities have comprehensive research data and other information, municipal and county planners, City and elected officials all of which have a vested interests as well as many residents share this vision
    of the entire area. The question remains how do we create the tide that raises all of the ships?

13. George Vietze
    June 29th, 2008 at 6:50 am

    John, the questions you raise, as I think about how they might apply to the City of Erie, the Convention Center and Bayfront area and the link to the downtown-midtown area and surrounding residential areas,are interesting and further point out the need for a total comprehensive look at planning larger interconnecting areas.

    The proximity of the Convention Center and the Bayfront area point out the need to plan the entire area together, as you point out, a great deal of the time some of these facilities are not used or filled at the same time and such things as sharing of parking facilities, transportation and supporting mixed uses become vital to the success of the entire area. I could see, based upon your comments, how parking for example, could be spread out between the Convention Center and Bayfront and could be utilitized at peak times by the downtown-midtown area for larger events, etc., This emphasizes the need for comprehensive planning not simply designing stand along facilities without considering the impact of those facilities to the vitality of the larger area.

    The details of the size, parking, infrastructure, economic viability and other factors need to be considered as part of this planning process.
    Nothing happens in a cohsesive comprehensive manner without some sort of a plan. The semantics of that plan are less important the content,, whether you call the study a comprehensive plan, master plan, demographic study, research study, economic feasibility study, is less important than having some sort of a plan in order to include that plan as part of the marketing packages of the area for all the interested parties, such as the Chamber of Commerce, Manufacturing & Business Association, the development community, investors and busineses, individuals, residents or local business interests all of which can look to this resource to decide which part of this plan they may want to include into their plan.

    I was reading in todays Erie Times about another retail store on Parade Street closing. If the downtown and midtown areas were more viable that plan would help the viability of Parade Street and other surrounding areas once a conceptual plan of the entire area demonstrates how the areas interconnect and manifest itself as the plan grows towards reality, but without a plan their is no vision Maybe better said, without that vision, their is no plan.

14. Erie BlogWatch
    June 29th, 2008 at 8:25 am

    John’s observations about Pittsburgh in this context are very insightful and instructive. It seems to me that downtown Cleveland suffers a similar fate if you substitute the names of some its major ‘attractions’ for those of Pittsburgh’s. For example, I was sorry to see the Flats district which seemed to hold so much promise some years ago seemed to be in real decline when I visited it briefly not too long ago. If I am not incorrect, they do have some sort of light rail/commuter rail extension serving the lakefront area including the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame as well as the Flats. To be honest, I am not sure how successful this has all been in ridership terms. A quick scan of a Wikipedia article suggests that expansion is planned although when/if its construction will commence seems unclear.

    A side note that the area around Cleveland’s West Side Market did seem to have undergone/was undergoing a bit of a successful revival. That was great to see. I always enjoy visiting the market and not far away is a good down-to-earth Polish restaurant [Sokolowski’s University Inn] for lunch or dinner if anyone is interested You can always work off all the kielbasa and glumpkis you eat at the Ciclovia !

    Anyhow, it just seems to me that there are lessons to be learned here too, given that both cities have ‘waterfronts’ and nearby civic attractions although the correspondence with Erie would not be a perfect fit in either case for obvious reasons.

    Haven’t followed what Buffalo is doing in this regard although I do occasionally glance at their blog “Fix Buffalo Today” which seems to focus more on revival in residential neighborhoods (equally important of course).

15. Erie BlogWatch
    June 29th, 2008 at 8:34 am

    Thought some more about my observations regarding ETN or local TV news organizations doing investigative reporting on interlocking authorities, agencies, etc.

    It occurred to me that (1) it probably would never happen for reasons of limited resources as well as corporate outlooks, and (2) in this case I’m not thinking ‘outside the box’ enough.

    How about if someone (individual or group) put together such a guide and made it available online ? Sort of a baedeker to behind-the-scenes Erie City & County [or even all of NW Pa], if you will. Kind of a ‘user’s guide’ or ‘owner’s manual’ …. analogous in spirit to David Pogue’s series of “Missing Manuals —- for Windows, iPhone, Facebook”. A wiki might be the way to get started, and what a great term project or independent study assignment for a high school civics/college poli sci class ! All it would take is someone engaged and empowered to champion and nurture it. And it wouldn’t have to be limited to just content of apparent interest to political junkies; quite the opposite.

    I might google around and see if there are any existing proof-of-concepts for other areas. Anyone know of such a thing ?

16. Peter Panepento
    June 29th, 2008 at 9:55 am

    EBW — I’d love to see if you find a good model. I’d also be very interested in having some portion of this site — a blog or some other page — that would be devoted to tracking the activities of Erie’s various authorities. If anyone has any ideas on this or would like to volunteer their time, please drop me a line and can discuss further.

17. George Vietze
    June 29th, 2008 at 10:11 am

    Great stuff! This is the kind of holistic and “out of the box’ thinking that will ad a transparency and knowledge to not only the local interest but to the eyes and ears of the world as Erie emerges from the past and move towards is destiny and potential of being the Great City on the Great Lake and will manifest a “sloglan” into reality. As another commentor has said many times, “Miss it and miss out!.
    Make my day…….

18. Julio C. Reyes
    June 29th, 2008 at 12:02 pm

    Peter,

    It is still too early in the game to get some real numbers/information. Once upon a time I took an Authority to court to request some inside information to figure out what was going on in little town. To my dismay I discovered that some Authorities do not even keep decent minutes of their board meetings.

    Everything was happening in backrooms agreements.

    I am certain that now with the new open books Law effective January 2009. Most of the cleaning will start happening automatically.

    http://www.openrecordspa.org/

    Just for the record. I want to repeat one more time I strongly believe most of the people working in public service I have interacted with in Little Town are decent and hard working. Unfortunately the system is broken.

19. john morris
    June 29th, 2008 at 12:03 pm

    Jane Jacobs really pointed out the problems large facilities can have integrating with the city. She talked a lot about the problems caused at the borders between land uses and the need to mix uses by time of use to create 24 activity. As a contrast, the renovation of Pittsburgh’s historic theaters downtown like Heinz Hall and the opening of a small art film theater like the Harris has been very positive.They integrate well into the city and are active at a time when the downtown offices are mostly closed. Walking between the cultural attractions has helped support restaurants. They are obvious ammenities for downtown residents.

    It’s very ironic, but actually stadiums have very, very poor records at kicking off development activity. I do have to admit that they can have intangible value that’s very important in reintroducing people to a neglected city or area. PNC’s setting is amazing and likely made people realize the development potential of the city.

    Believe it or not, given Pittsburgh,s very limited amount of flat buildable space and the amount wasted on the stadiums, I actually advocate the idea of tearing Heinz field down ASAP. The North Side might be the cities most valuable property and the hole it is now really draggs down the nearby downtown which is further harmed by the seperation between downtown and the lower hill caused by another stadium.

20. George Vietze
    June 29th, 2008 at 2:33 pm

    John, that information is potentially very valuable, and further points to the concept that a definitive study needs to be undertaken prior to the construction of any venue to determine the proper mix, size, parking requirements and as you pointed out the effect on the surrounding
    uses. It also emphasis the needt that no just any consultant or study is appropriate in all circumstances, a community as unique as Erie ,with very specific needs both culturally and demographicly mandates a consultant or planners with precise local information on what uses and requirements are unique to this area. My experience with both San Diego and Phoenix is that major positive changes only came about after building large stadiums in the downtown area. Erie may be quite different ,which is all the more reason that careful study needs to be a part of any planning process as well as coordination with as many surrounding uses as practical. The role of a planning department is to compile and coordinate all the available planning information and coordinate with Economic Development sources and community input and present recommendations to the Mayor and City Council. Coordination with County Planners and other political entities such as certain Authorities and others who may be effected by any plan.
    I am not a planner and am not fully aware of all the details that need to be covered in all circumstances, but for obvious reasons understand the importance of prior planning before committing large amounts of money that will have an impact on the future of any area

    Planning does not have to limit the power of government to perform whatever politics a municipality choses to endorse, a planning department compiles data, sometimes at their own direction and in a lot of cases at direction of Mayor and City Council members, in fact, as someone pointed out, this process sometimes benefits politicals if the planners have the information ready at the time the political powers can maximize a political benefit. The municipality can decide what policies that want to pursue, direct the planners and the planning department will put those policies in writing in the form of a written planning document and that becomes one of the tools used to market the area, subject to the plan. A plan is only as good as the quality of its implementation which should be guided by the planning process which include such things as architectural controls, sign ordinances,
    traffic, utilities, environmental concerns, zoning, etc.,

    It is not as if Erie is totally void in the planning process, in my short experience in this area, I know first hand that township approval requires City and County planning overview and approval and that personnel like Brenda Sandburg who I believe is now working on Downtown Redevelopment has planning exxperience and that the Erie County Planning Department has a good staff that reviews plans for approval, my experience with that staff is that they are detailed and complete in their oversight responsibilities. My emphasis on planning is from the point of view that prudent planning prior to spending large amounts of money only makes common sense and that unless we have a plan to market it is difficult to present to outsiders what it is that we want to accomplish and what are the rules of the game that outside and local investors and developers can expect and put the control of the quality of potential developments in the hands of the municipalities
    rather than totally dictated by the development community that represents only their interests and not necessarily the communities best interest.

21. john morris
    June 29th, 2008 at 4:33 pm

    My direct experience is mostly in two cities with very restricted supplies of land– NY and Pittsburgh.Most mega stadium developments in both cities have been mildly to severely negative. Yankee stadium has done little for the South Bronx and now that the area is reviving on it’s own, it’s parking requirements are a big drag.Pheonix extends for something like 500 square miles so it has a bit of leeway in terms of throwing land around.

    It does seem like in cities with extremely depressed and ignored downtowns and sprawling suburbs, sports teams can act as one of the few forces powerfull enough to draw people in. Detroit, seems to be seeing a bit of an urban revival and stadiums seem been an early catalyst as it was in Baltimore. Baltimore’s Camden Yards is likely the most overhyped ond oversold projects in history. It’s long term impact is still up in the air.

    Erie is probably somewhere in between in that the land area of 28 square miles is small but the layout is simple and the supply of usefull flat space doesn’t look as restricted as Pittsburgh’s.

    I think a lot of stadium oriented developments will look to people in the future as being “so eighties and nineties”. Most of them seem to have been built around the sad and I think misguided assumption that cities as a whole were hopelessly unattractive as places to live or work. The best they could do was to hope that their former residents and tourists might drop by to watch a game, during which they were, I guess supposed to consume hundreds of dollars in overpriced beer, hot dogs and perhaps sushi to pay for it all.

    One of the basic assumptions that seems to have underlied stadium developments was that the land they occupied and all the land needed for their supporting roads and parking lots had little or no high value use.

    I think as more cities see organic demand for residential and other uses, the misguided nature of many of these developments is getting more obvious.

    Philly for example is starting to see the stark conflict between projects that are built around large numbers of non resident drivers, like two proposed waterfront casinos and regular, mixed use urban oriented development.

    “Since the November 2007 release of the civic vision, the Central Delaware Advocacy Group (a consortium of 15 river-ward civic associations) has worked with PennPraxis to define concrete steps to redevelop the river. (Note: The two casinos as currently proposed, along with a plethora of other large-scale, automobile-dependent development proposals, do not meet the planning principles established in the civic vision.)

    So the group has produced “An Action Plan for the Central Delaware: 2008-2018,” a 10-step guide to developing the riverfront during the next 10 years. The action plan calls for a public investment strategy in streets, parks and mass transit that can support quality private development. Nutter’s call Tuesday night for a master plan for the central Delaware is just the place to start. The plan also calls for the following immediate steps:”

    http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/20080622_A_Civic_Vision.html

    The West Side stadium proposal in Manhattan was killed off as people thought realistically about the alternative uses for such a valuable piece of land. Nobody took Bloomberg’s claim that a stadium was needed to make Midtown Manhattan’s last large lot of undeveloped property attractive.

22. George Vietze
    June 29th, 2008 at 6:18 pm

    John Morris, thank you for posting the above link. Anyone who has an interest in this area should open that link and come to their own conclusion of the value of planning. John, you seem to have a solid background in planning and your input is extremely valuable to the planning concept that has the potential of taking Erie to the next levl
    of enlightenment towards implementing their goals, that have yet to be even determined.

    I have gained a great deal insite reading your posts, like you say Phoenix has hundred of square miles of land and very different demographics tha Erie. A larger sports facility may not be the type of facility Erie should have.

    Erie also has a seasonal problem in dealing with the demographics of the winter season. As Julio Reyes mentioned, “winter, winter,winter”, I certainly don’t propose to be a planner and even if I were, I don’t have anywhere close to the local knowledge necessary to form a definitive opinion ,with the exception that I am a strong proponent of the concept of
    quality planning. There is a considerable renewed interest in Erie by a lot of the existing groups that represent the interest of this area and a lot of new cutting edge thinking by some young and energetic talent and mixed with experienced players who will come together and move this area forward. It starts with forums such as this that generate the thoughts that fill the quantum space and with focus ,will manifest the reality. The question in my mind, “What is the Plan for that reality?”.

    This is not a new idea in Erie, Julio Reyes and others have said for years they have beat the same drum. They say, timing is everything,
    maybe the time has come.

23. Jim
    June 30th, 2008 at 6:34 am

    I think another issue that needs to be part of the equation is the amount of available space for redevelopment. Erie currently has an enormous amount of available space in any number of zoning classifications, and apparently is about to get more, if the article relating to loss of Parade Street businesses comes to fruition.

    I think that for too long we have looked at development as a disassociated group of individual projects, and not as a coordinated effort. We don’t seem to deal well with a coordinated long term effort, more prone to jumping for project to project, as Parade Street has illustrated. The problem is that approach puts initial investment at risk as it prevents the initial investments from achieving potential. Again Parade Street offers the example with both the Mill and the death of development after their investment, and the lack of redevelopment around the East Erie Turners, about to cause the consideration of relocation.

    We jumped from Parade Street, back to the Bay Front, now to Griswald. Will that central city project get completed before a loss of interest causes another jump to somewhere and something else. I believe it is tough to build upon success, and set a tempo, unless you maintain the focus and determination to see these area projects through to completion, which has not been done. Instead of the shotgun approach, we need to limit ourselves to doing a few things exceedingly well, then build upon those successes.

    Unrelated to Erie, I was talking to an authority member of another municipality at a party on Sunday, and was told it was becoming way to burdensome to get the massive number of approvals in place to go forward, and the costs associated with that process are a disincentive to even starting the process. He mentioned a development proposal in his municipality that has been undergoing environmental review for over three years with no end in sight to either the process or the cost. He thinks the project will collapse under the costs and delay. As a long time water authority member, he said there was just no working with the DER DEP people. That got me to wondering how much potential growth we lose every year from indecision and the costs associated with it. In this case it was environmental, but I assume similar stories exist regarding other required development approvals.

    Several years back there was a lot written about the need to consolidate the processes, chiefly dealing with marketing and financing, but I never read much about the need to do the same with regulatory approval processes. I wonder if its something we need to explore in more depth.

24. George Vietze
    June 30th, 2008 at 7:25 am

    Jim, you raised some very important subjects. One of the reasons I support comprehensive planning efforts is that brings to light to the development community and others that are trying to make decisions which communitiies to invest their time and money, it is important to make transparent the goals and policies of an approving authority be it a City, Authority or State government. The openness, cost and speed of the approval process is a major factor in that decision. Speeding up the cost of approvals in a major factor in developing a community.
    The DEP reputation for limiting developement is well known in this area
    and is a tool that can be helpful in limiting projects that endanger the environment and but also be overused to limit and control quality growth by the interests who prefer limited growth. You are absolutely correct, in my opinion, of your observation of the “spot” planning and lack of comprehensive overview of the planning process and the jumping around and lack of follow through that a more comprehensive planning process would embrace. A faster and more efficient development approval process, if implemented, would signal the development interests that the community welcomed quality development. If the community had a plan that could be observed,
    policies, guidelines and procedures that a developer/investor could understand and feel confortable that if followed a fast and efficient approval could be the end result that would be a developer/investor’s dream scenerio. This is great discussion and is opening up the minds of the community and will make a difference in the progress of Erie as we move forward.

    I learned a long time ago a very important lesson in life, every individual, company, entity receives a reputation by the way they behave over the long term. People make decisions every day who they care to spend their time, money and effort based upon their perception of the situation. The City is no different, do you think that Erie’s reputation was a secret. Erie is not different in that respect than any other City.
    Just like the reputation of the DEP or any other group that has potential to abuse its power, the word gets out and people make different decisions. Another choice is to make transparent the potential for abuse and do something positive about improving the situation, that is what I see is happening in Erie, people are concerned about this community and with current communication vehicles such as this forum and other venues the culture in Erie is moving toward a more holistic approach that generates questions, thoughts and answers that with proper focus moves towards implementation. This is cutting edge “stuff” but Erie has the talent and concern and focus in its culture to make a huge impact in this area. Great post Jim, you add a great deal of value and balance to this goal.