Tuesday, March 02, 1999

UPMC and Pitt, Sad to Say, May Not Fit Here Now

Houses, Mountain, Rivers...
"It is indeed an opinion strangely prevailing amongst men, that houses, mountains, rivers, and in a word all sensible objects have an existence natural or real, distinct from their being perceived by the understanding. But with how great an assurance and acquiescence so ever this principle may be entertained in the world; yet whoever shall find in his heart to call it in question, may, if I mistake not, perceive it to involve a manifest contradiction. For what are the forementioned objects but the things we perceive by sense, and what do we perceive besides our own ideas or sensations; and is it not plainly repugnant that any one of these or any combination of them should exist unperceived?"
George Berkeley - The Principles of Human Knowledge

UPMC and Pitt, Sad to Say, May Not Fit Here Now

Perhaps yes, perhaps no. Nonetheless, the questions are valid. The feelings are valid. The history and trends give cause for concern too. Ponder this, and respond if you wish.
Suggestions
So as to not be sad in the future, so as to build the fabric of our community, and so as to put better harmony into our lives, we need to come up with real-world examples, both good and bad, that illustrate ways in which a large institution can fit in better.
Good Neighbor Operations Means:
Neighborhood Integration Means:
Neighbor Infrastructure Support Means:
Coddle Employees Means:

Backyard in full swing. Call to City Council for public hearing on the UPMC Sports Medicine Complex

The Citizen Call to City Council for a Public Hearing

Signatures Submitted

As per city requirements, more than 25 people have signed a petition thereby expressing and interest to hold and attend a Public Hearing on the pending sale of land presently owned by the U.R.A. to U.P.M.C. for a Sports Performance compound to be built on the South Side's LTV site.

The petitions were turned into the City Clerk's office on Monday, March 1, 1999 by Mark Rauterkus, a city resident. City Council got a three minute peek on February 17 to some of the red flags about this development. A wide range of people from many sections in the city choose to sign the petition to request the public hearing. Pettitions were passed around at the University of Pittsburgh, at the South Side Market House and at a high-tech firm, US Web Pittsburgh.

See the OLD Web Site or Send Email for Specifics:

Thanks for the consideration.

Mark Rauterkus, retired coach & publisher of sports titles
South Side Market House Volunteer and South Side Home Owner
Stay-at-home Dad of Erik (4) and Grant (1)
Home phone: 412-481-2540

The Citizen Call to City Council for a Public Hearing - UPMC Sports Medicine folly

The Citizen Call to City Council for a Public Hearing

Signatures Submitted

Regional Issue

A public hearing on this issue is important. The proposed plans play on the city-wide stage and have regional consequences. The impact of these decisions goes beyond the South Side to Oakland (looses the day-to-day activities of the football team at Pitt and some 800+/- jobs) to the North Side (looses the day-to-day activities of the Steelers football team and the Steelers' corporate headquarters) and to all the corners of the city. The happenings on the LTV site can set the stage for later efforts at the 200+ acre Hazelwood site, Nine-Mile Run and other URA developments. What happens on the South Side, and why it happens, impacts many corners of the city.

Because of the regional and city-wide impact, it is most important for all the members of city council to give the plans and the alternatives careful consideration with an open minded approach.

The graceful custom of City Council to often cast votes based upon the desires of the individual City Council Memeber who resides in that district is not suitable here. Everyone on City Council needs to be fully aware of this development plan and the related issues. Please do not opt to base voting decisions according to some "default decision methods."

Many people who live outside the city expressed and interest to sign the petition, but could not do so because of the stipulated rules. Some would like to speak at the public hearing.

Philosophy, Policy and Planning

We want astonishing developments to occur. This pending transaction and policy approach is sure to impact city residence for decades. The endeavor is similar to the building of the new stadiums on the North Side. in that everyone is called to make a space that impacts all city-council districts.

Plan B Fallout

Now that the finance hurdle of the two stadiums has been crossed, let's gather ourselves and look into the looming shaddows of Plan B's future. Now it is time to move onto the next decisions. Earnest discussion begin because:

There is a natural fallout and aftermath of Plan B.
The training facilities took a back-seat to the discussion of game-day facilities.
The scope of focus widens to training, citizens and institutions.
There is much to do beyond the new building issues and corporate convention center scheduling. Now it is time to give a care about the players who are NOT under professional contracts with agents.

Promised Position Paper

This public hearing is going to come in the wake of a position paper put forth for open public scruitiny and input. This living document, version 1.0 to be released in the first week of March, 1999, takes a long look at the needs of the little guys, the small-businesses, and the kids. City Council's attention to these matters addresses the other end of the spectrum -- away from professional athletes, corporate sky boxes and Pitt's interests. Let's give the ideas some consideration and input opportunities. Let's stop UPMC's plans for all the right and honorable reasons. Let's redirect UPMC's willingness to grow by pointing out better ways to achieve this growth.

Advanced Discussions in Meaningful Ways

The goal is to be positive and to present uplifting solutions to some difficult challenges. Version 1.0 of the Position Paper and the delivery of the petitions for the Public Hearing to the City Clerk are coupled events. Knowledge of the hearing and knowledge of the position paper should make for more fertile discussions to come.

People need to take the microphone to make public statements and public promises on many issues that circle these plans.

Let's wait and see if the owners of the Steelers show up and assert the claim that the Steelers are to make a permanent move of its corporate headquarters out of the North Sie and onto the South Side to be a tennant at the proposed UPMC site.

Let's wait and see if the University of Pittsburgh football coach can stand to see his athletes manage pressing schedules as student-athletes with daily trips out of Oakland. The proposed site means a trip off campus, down Bates Street, up Second Avenue, across the unopened Hot Metal Bridge, and along River View Drive to the football practices, tudor/study sessions, rehab, film reviews, conditioning practices. The commute times (plus rush hour, plus hurt limbs, plus need for personal cars, plus closing of the Glenview Bridge for 18 months and the Ft. Pitt Bridge for additional time) are sure to burn hours out of players' days.

Let's wait and see who says what when the NCAA compliance officers prohibit the sharing of the same facility at the same time with professional athletes, as clearly stated in the NCAA Manuals.

Let's wait and see what amount of money UPMC wants to grant to the South Side athletes.

Prelude to City Council's Public Hearing and Vote

Much work and education should be slated with the help of City Council before the formal public hearing even occurs.

Telivised Round Table Discussions Are Welcomed

Let's schedule open discussions and informational sessions that can lead up to the Public Hearings. I'm sure that the citizens would like to know what is slated with the pending UPMC plans. Let's give the URA and UPMC television opportunities to outline and detail the pending plans. Understanding a $30-Million development with various buildings, new road-way construction, complicated site challenges takes time. Only the informed can expect to get beyond the glitz of a new complex to see the flaws and troubles. Unknown plans can't garner objections nor improvements nor outside recomendations. Wiser to dismantle and re-assemble plans rather than buildings and roads, yet alone the river and flood-plane issues.

Case in point, the present location of Dr. Freddie Fu's Sports Medicine office includes a therapy pool. The aquatic's pool, built into an existing building on Baum Blvd., and the extensive remodeling for Sports Medicine occurred in 1990. Seemingly, the hydro-therapy pool doesn't fit its present location and reportedly is constantly under reapair. UPMC remodeled the building at considerable costs. To retrofit and accomidate specialized sports equipment, i.e., swimming pools, is both new and abandoned properties is expensive. Let's ponder the plans and see if UPMC is going to repeat past mistakes like the ones at the existing Sports Medicine offices or like the ones at its indoor football practice facilities, The Cost Center.

Video Tape and Broadcast the URA Board Meeting

The URA staff should make a technical presentation to the URA board on the sale of land to UPMC in the days ahead. Let's capture that presentation on tape and on the URA.org web site so we can review the details before the public hearing. Another show-and-tell session that covers the A-B-Cs is not needed as the troubles happen more in mid-stream near L-M-N-O and P.

I'd like to request the broadcasting of a number of meetings before the public hearing.

The city-wide cable can be used as a before the Public Hearing and before the eventual City Council vote on this issue. This is an extra consideration that does not need to be granted by the Sunshine Law and such. I'd like to see City Council go the extra mile for me now so we can facilitate some extra communications on these on-topic issues.

When the stage is set for a public hearing, certain things can be accomplished, but other items and issues flounder. Speakers with an opportunity of a three-minute sound-bite can't address philosophy, global issues, nor any lengthy first hand accounts. A public hearing can be a forum to display a watershed of pent up ideas in support for specific legislation about to be enacted. But, a public hearing is not a debate. Otherwise, let's call a public hearing and get to the roots of society's ills.

Give and Take Is Needed For Excellent Planning

A lot of give and take is needed to craft philosophies and to uncover both the basics and the spectacular. There isn't any give and take within the process with the minute expections of:

The URA Director gets asked some questions by City Council at Working Meetings on Wednesdays.
The URA Board gets together to sign-off on the projects that the staff submits.
Tame community groups are tickled with tidbits and ponder window-dressing design conerns.

If UPMC and Pitt make a $30 million mistake with its move and development to the South Side, they can then, in-turn, choose to close Pitt Stadium. That then becomes another mistake with a possible price tag of $200-$300 million. The people of our city suffer and the people have to pick-up the pieces, such as is the case with UPMC arch-rival AHERF's $1.6 billion bankrupcy.

Pitt already built an indoor football practice facility in the 90s. Let's let them use that one for a while longer.

UPMC isn't a private corporation, but a public-non-profit hospital in a volitile health-care industry. Let's talk about little leagers, scholastic sports and wellness issues. Let's talk about employee fitness, day-care responsiblities and improving access. Let's talk about Pitt too, its state funding, its tenure record, its public space policy in Oakland.

Passion Park, voice elsewhere

Be Very Proud of Accomplishments

We all get intense feelings of pride when we, or our children who've we nurtured, excel at something they love.

Intense feelings matter. Great experiences and excelling occur with nurturing, effort and sense of ownership. Great experiences can kindle the sparks for newly discovered passions. Stringing passionate experience opportunity together by providing places for these activities, and soon we'll have a community of passionate people.

It takes a seed to move a mountain.

Enjoy the following account (and dialog) about a great experience with music posted to the internet from a fellow in Seattle. The story is posted so as to better illustrate and support the call for the creation of a new space, code name, Passion Park, an extension of the South Side Market House and South High School.

Date:    Tue, 2 Mar 1999 02:10:06 EST
From:    Reginald Unterseher 
Subject: A Trip To Chicago

Chance, my 12-year-old, and I got back last night from our ACDA (American
Choral Director's Association) National Honor Boychoir Chicago adventure.  We
had the BEST time! It was just incredible.  We got there Wednesday afternoon
and the boys had a rehearsal that night.  The sound of 252 of the best boy
singers in the whole country (ages ranged from 8-15) was almost indescribable.
They were instantly all in tune, singing the right notes. The sound was so
beautiful that all I could do was just stand there with my jaw dropping,
almost not able to breathe. The most beautiful sound I have ever heard.

The boys really worked hard. I was there as chaperone with Chance and Mark,
another Consort Columbia Children's Chorus boy--they were the only boys from
the whole state of Washington. They were really glad that they had put in the
work ahead of time, memorizing their 8 pieces of rather advanced literature.
The vast majority of the boys had, and they were not pleased with the ones who
hadn't. They rehearsed 3 hours the first night, six hours each on the next two
days, went to a concert Thursday night, 3 hours on Saturday, and then the
concert Saturday night.  We had done a lot of preparation on how to deal with
that much rehearsal time without wrecking their voices, and by concert time
they felt good. We spent most non-rehearsal moments napping.

I mostly spent my time with the boys in their rehearsals, but also got to hear
a concert by the King's Singers, the Vancouver Chamber Singers, and Phillip
Brunelle's chorus in Orchestra Hall, several Russian choirs in another hall.
Between the time on the plane and the boy's nap times, I even had time to read
a book. I book that had nothing to do with music of any kind. Pretty much
heaven, for me.

We also had a blast in the few hours we had to play around.  The Sears Tower,
Chicago pizza, Michigan Avenue, the Navy Pier, Grant Park, Lake
Michigan--mostly on Saturday night after the concert and then all day Sunday.
Chicago is such a great place to visit, one of my absolute favorite places.

They were the subject of a half page article/photo in our local paper while
they were gone, which they were very excited about.  Even a teaser photo on
the front page.

The very best thing about the trip, though, was watching these boys. They
would look at each other, say "We are in CHICAGO!" and high five each other.
They had worked hard to prepare, spending many hours on their own as well as
with me, and were so glad to be there.  They behaved very professionally in
rehearsals. They were part of something special, did their part very well, had
really accomplished something, and they knew it. They will remember this their
whole lives, and so will I.

Reg, back in WA

Suggestion

Have the article mounted and framed somehow and give it to your son as a gift, along with a card, of course, telling him how proud you are. (And you're obviously -- and justifiably -- nuts with pride over this guy and his friends.) He'll keep it forever!

>what was the criteria in picking these voices?
>Doug
>

Every year, the American Choral Director's Association National Convention has
several Honor Choirs, typically of about 250 members each.  This year, it was
a Boychoir, a High School Choir, and a Women's Choir.  Directors who are ACDA
members get application forms, typically about 10 months in advance of the
convention.

The application consisted of a taped audition and a series of questions for
the choir director about their skills and habits.  For the tape, the boys had
to sing a solo and then sing a series of arpeggios that demonstrated their
range, voice quality, and how well they could sing in tune.  Different
directors have different criteria, but I only submitted boys who I felt had
the complete package--voice, sight reading and other musicianship issues,
experience, and behavior in concert and rehearsal.  I had two other boys in my
Children's Chorus that had the voice, but not the other skills, so I did not
submit them.

They chose 250 out of the over 500 applicants. I suspect that it was a
combination of things--not only the quality of audition and the strength of
the recommendation (which is hard to gauge if you do not know the director!),
but a desire to have many areas of the country represented.  In this choir,
boys came from 30 states.  The country's major boychoir organizations were all
well represented, but so were kids from smaller programs like mine.

Reg in WA

Lucky Us

I was involved in many events like this as a kid and it's true - they *will* remember it forever.

Input Welcomed

Other examples of Passion and Park Passions are going to welcome. Post in the comments.

Monday, March 01, 1999

For or Against

Polarized Pittsburgh

Through the past months, as in phone conversations and in person, this question seems to surface rather quickly, "Are you for it or against it."

My typical reply is, "Neither."

"The Master said, 'The superior man, in the world, does not set his mind either for anything, or against anything; what is right he will follow.'"
Confucius - Analects

Fight Card

Going Upstream

The aims of this position paper is to ask City Council to reverse some very strong tides. City Council is being asked to think, delay, unravel plans and buck-up against:

the U.R.A.
(and in turn the Mayor),
UPMC,
the Rooney's,
Dr. Freddie Fu,
the Pitt Athletic Department,
Oxford Development, and
one esteemed neighborhood group and its site-steering sub-committee.

Many Goliaths

Taken together, the tides that flow out of the quarters of the above group presents formidable opposition.

The URA, Oxford Development and UPMC draw upon professionals insights with years of experience in such developments. Five months have passed since the news-making event hit the public regarding a "Sports Performance Compound." What's more, the bulldozers and graders have already been working on the sight since January. The heavy equipment is there with the joint blessing of URA and UPMC. These folks want quick progress, and they fully anticipate quick approval and implementations. Football fields are needed by August, 1999. A delay of game is going a costly set-back, they'll be sure to say.

David's Attack Comes In The Cloak of Darkness, Regrettable Darkness

David of the Old Testament fought against the giant Goliath. David was alone in his fight. Sure, the first draft of this position paper began with a lone voice, but the release of the position paper to the public ends the presumption of a David-and-Goliath fight. The position paper is a living document. Allies are being welcomed. Others are flocking to the fight, and the weapons of wisdom and reason are being sharpened and leveraged into the arsenal of ideas. So, as the days progress and the public hearing comes closer to the present, the lone-voice is long gone.

History of Lone Voice

Mark Rauterkus, a concerned citizen, begged repeatedly to get an invitiation to the planning table. Claiming local roots and some knowledge of sports facilities, the South Side Planning Forum's Steering Committee meeting in late January 1999 included a stranger to the inner sanctum. The community access issues for the UPMC plan were were "nebulious at best." Things were not settled and had yet to unfold in much detail so said UPMC and the URA.

That late January meeting would mark the first and last invitation to the world of closed-door meetings of the planning players for Mark Rauterkus. All the other insights would have to come via monthly public meetings, the media and direct contibutions to this living position paper.

The fight brews in the cloak of darkness. The UPMC plans are secret plans crafted in private. To the public, the UPMC plans, like the Pitt Athletic Director's plans, are unknown. What are they going to do? Is this a "done deal?" So little has been revealed. To dismantle a plan cloaked in isolation and on short notice is a feat. For example, a site map that marked the proposed purchase of UPMC land has been requested since November, and none has been furnished as of March 1, 1999.

What is to come from Pitt, as a reaction to this open position paper or otherwise, is anyone's guess. But, something from Pitt is sure to come. Pitt moved with spitefulness and its Police Force to restrain Free Speach already. Pitt's reaction to Student Government's move of delivering complementary T-Shirts with Save Our Stadium messages was appaling.

Everyone loves easy choices and "no-brainer" decisions. At first glance everything might appear to be in good order to allow City Council to go with the flow and approve the URA proposal. The UPMC agenda is strengthened by the push and pull of the Goliaths running in the cover of darkness. But, after the entire discussion is opened and after visible alternatives are set forth, the decisions to delay and even reject the sale of land from the URA to UPMC for its plans is going to be easy and obvious.

Beyond a Fight

For City Council to garner the five votes to put an abrupt roadblock into the pathway of development, low-cost to development to the city's treasury even, just because it gets to witness a fight and some fur fly is silly. The fight waged here is against the process. The fight illustrates to City Council its sacred role in the developmental approval process. Pittsburgh's global leadership for development issues has to include City Council and has to include the citizens' ideas.

The Goliaths are driving the development steamrollers. The Goliaths are flattening our collective futures. They need to stop their bulldozers and graders on the site.

The aim of the position paper isn't to fight with a David-vs.-Goliath

City Council can grab onto some of the philosophical messages and re-build the next projects to a higher level, as suggested here. The vision for stretching our collective wills is lurking in the pages ahead. Its the cutting-edge solutions that are craved the most by the people, not the fight against the Goliaths.

Delay of Game

City Council, "Blow the whistle!" Call a foul. Order a delay of game penalty. Please pour over this information and help to uncover additional information. Let's work together to put a light onto all the viable alternatives and ground them in known philosophical justificiations. Let's reach to new heights, building upon what is good. Let's tackle some risky, tricky, tough, and global problems by leveraging our insights and our top instititions.

Within this position paper we suggest better solutions that leverage the Pittsburgh Steelers in creative ways to significantly improve our public school system.
Within this position paper we suggest better solutions that leverage UPMC's fiscal clout to better integrate Pitt into the South Side.
Within this position paper we suggest better solutions that leverage the unique flavors of the South Side so our quilt of community has stronger fabrics and brighter small-business enterprise.

Position paper -- or pink paper

Position Paper, Version 1.0

More Pink than White

A position paper is the expected outcome of this process. To call this position paper a "White Paper" is presumptuous. Perhaps "Pink Paper" fits, as some might see red.

Virtual Reading

The Position Paper, Version 1.0, is to live on the internet. Of course, the document can be printed, bound in a three-ring binder and delivered to those off-line. To peek at this document without on-line access, attend a scheduled meetings. Otherwise, call Mark Rauterkus, 412-481-2540 (daylight).

Paper and printing resources are scares in this volunteer effort.
News outlets and organizations can not be expected to quickly generate printed versions of this document without significant costs.
Bandwidth is available and offers the highest levels of interactivity.

Thursday, February 18, 8:30 pm, Mark et House, 12th Street, South Side
Monday, February 22 at 8:30 pm, Mark et House
A South Side Planning Forum meeting is slated for Wednesday, February 24, 5:30 pm at the Brasher Association. * Don't expect the Position Paper Draft there.

Getting A Grip

Hundreds of issued are raised here. A series of multi-threaded conversations are necessary. One aim of this position paper is to supplement the discussions by charting a new courses with better discussion tools.

Public meeting do serve as fertile grounds in some instances, and public meetings should be leveraged here again. Nonetheless, with this scope of concern and its myriad of players, a diet limited to public meeting and closed-door deal-making is destined for long-term failure. Public meetings have a tendancy to be unweilding, ego-laden, and repetitive.

Another grandstand review presentation in a public forum that bolsters by-gone days in the overall planning process has been in the past is not going to serve our desires for finding creditable solutions for the future. Let's document the past triumphs, not dwell upon them, and move to the issues at hand today. Radio call-in talk shows seem to be unweilding, ego-laden, and repetitive too. Wild opinions can run their course in this position paper and then be tempered by experts before the microphones, challenged with follow-up questions. Points, counter-points and even pointers to other sets of points and counter-points are most welcomed here.

Case in point: The South Side Neighborhood Plan approved by the South Side Forum in 1998 mentions that the Pittsburgh Penguins (NHL) practice at Nevile Ice Rink --- wrong.

Drilling Deep

Hundreds of issues are presented within these discussions. All the issues relate, in one way or another, to the overall quagmire. Expect book-like depth and grit, not gloss. Below the surface, things are more often shades of gray rather than black or white. The media can polorize issues with sound bites and missconceptions. So too can elected leaders perhaps.

Here, let's look at the good, the bad and the ugly in a frank manner. Case in point, the UPMC Sports Performance compound sounds like a great idea, and it is at certain levels. But at other levels, this compound is awful. Let's take the time to communicate and insure that we obtain physical structures that meet the "highest and best use" goals as stated. This world does not need another atrocious indoor football practice facility like that built by the University of Pittsburgh in the 90s know as the Cost Center.

Case in point: The LTV Site Plan cost more than $70,000. That document looks swell (see it at the South Side Branch of the Carnegie Library by asking a libarian). The document painted a vision of the future by using large brush strokes. However, UPMC folks chastise the notion of "flex-office space" put forth by that plan. A UPMC person would have us understand that flex-office space is neither desired nor feasible. Debunking flex-office space for football practice fields and highest grade office/medical space, while creating 40 new jobs on nearly as many acres is at gross odds to the creditability of the past planning efforts. What gives, why and how and what comes next are all addressed in their many shades of grey in the litany that follows.

Stay tuned and help to discover why and how we can proceed. If necessary, let's not be afraid to turn back the tides of past failures. Let's fight about the truth and the positions that they stake out for the region, not fighting over the personalities.

Feedback Schedule: As Soon As Possible

Please do NOT wait for the printed version to arrive before you make your input know to the editors of this document. Input your ideas concerning what is presented here as well as what is not here.

Time is a factor. Your insights are needed now. The graders are on the grounds, at the direction of UPMC with the good graces from the URA now. They are moving earth for roads and with other preperation efforts as football players are hoped for in August, so the UPMC dream unfolds.

Is It Soup Yet?

The version number in the title of the document reminds us that this is a work in progress. As opionions are put forth, further investigation and input can recycle. This document live and be more of a process, such is life.

Tone

This position paper takes positions! Bold stands, claims of reasoning, offering benchmarks of accountability are necessary. Plans need to go beyond demographic overviews. One problem stems from the plans while another problem stems from a failing planning process.

Failed Planning Process
	leads to
		Failed Plans
			leads to
				Failed Futures

Righting Wrongs

The URA operates as it sees fit and says otherwise. In November 1998, the news of the UPMC Sports Performance compound hit the first light of day along with a 90-day open discussion period. Ha!

Getting an audience with people at the URA is a major feat. The URA folks can pass the referal along and say, "Hey, we are working with community groups. Go take your beef to them." The URA wants to send citizens and their concerns to community groups that rubber stamp its agenda, delay input for three months and wallop behind the cloak of concensus building.

The South Side Forum operates under the burden of a consensus. The South Side Planning Forum can't champion cutting-edge ideas. The South Side Planning Forum can't do anything that would tip the boat in the slightest. If the forum can't draw upon the support of a every single member, it goes nowhere. A single "nay vote" defeats actions.

An old slogan says that a camel is an example of a horse built by committee. A stubborn donkey must be the beast of burden of choice for those who dwel in the shaddows of consensus-built tents.

Wednesday, February 24, 1999

Dear Fellow Parents, Neighbors and Friends of Youth and Sports,

Alarm bells are ringing and red flags are waving with me in recent weeks within certain political circles when it comes to issues we all know and love at the Market House.

Your help is needed in urgent ways. We must swell our base of influence and support among ourselves and in the community.

Standing Meetings

The Market House Athletic Association has regular meetings on the first Wednesday of the month at 6:30 pm. Your attendance at these meetings is welcomed.

Special Meeting to Address Critical Opportunities

Please attend a community meeting at the Market House on Tuesday, March 9 at 7:30 pm.

Reasons for Alarm and Input:

A Coalition among many sports, fitness and recreation groups has been formed.
A $30 Million Sports Performance compound by UPMC is in planning stages.
A Grant of new funds of $30,000, now inflated to $75,000, has been mentioned.
The building of additional fields and upgrading existing fields is possible.
The expansion of the bike-path and river walk is going to occur.
Green-space enhancements are expected.

Aggressive, Global Insights Put Forth by a Position Paper Need Discussions:

A New Aerobics Center for Seniors is being suggested.
A New Indoor Aquatics Center is needed in Pittsburgh.
A New Parking Garage, being denied by the Mayor, is possible for the South Side.

City Council and Public Schools Issues Surfacing:

After-school activities are getting more attention from in the wake of recent shootings.
The removal of all Swim-Pool Fees for all citizens (or kids only) is being voted upon.
An out-of-town ballplayers' tax to raise more than $250,000 is earmarked for a new Public Parks Trust Fund.

Tuesday, February 23, 1999

"Death is always a great pity of course but it's not as though the alternative were immortality."

Tom Stoppard

Killing the UPMC Plan for the LTV Site

Squashing UPMC's development plan slated for the LTV site is possible.

Could Happen
The UPMC plans could fail to reach the necessary votes at the city council level.
The South Side Planning Forum nor its LTV Site Steering Committee is expected to move against the UPMC plan. The locals, acting under a charter of consensus, won't want to "rock the boat" and would rather "rubber-stamp APPROVAL" and "stay at the table" than create a hassle. Besides, the Local Development Corporation of the South Side has a spot on the LTV Steering Committee and it conducts business with the URA in other developments, so it has a conflict of interest in raising a negative vote and opinion on the UPMC plan. The LDC needs to get along with the URA for a number of other proects. A no vote could jeopardize the LDC's "working relationship" with the URA. But, with strong reasons presented here and elsewhere, the local leadership of the South Side could express its voice of serious concern and aim to delay the developments for further study.

Squashing UPMC's development plan would go against wishes of:

UPMC's planners
University of Pittsburgh Athletic Department Personelle who wanted to move
Steelers who wanted out of the North Side
Oxford Development people who despise re-design efforts
the URA leaders that love have their own ways in spite of themselves
perhaps the Mayor.

Prepared Statement to South Side Planning Forum on Feb 23, 1999

From Mark Rauterkus, South Side Market House Association, and Convener's Chair of the sports and recreation coalition.

The following was submitted to the Planning Forum Chair a day following the evening meeting on February 23. A prepared statement memo was utilized so as to be a part of the minutes, but to not occupy the time of those present at the meeting. Furthermore, because a seat at the FORUM table is not designated to the Market House Association, nor the new Nonprofit Coalition, nor any other agency with a primary mission for the sports, fitness or recreation industry, there isn't a suitable representative to pass along these messages. Hence, Mark Rauterkus, a frequent visitor to the South Side Planning Forum Meetings since at least the time of the announced plans of UPMC Sports Performance Compound, submits the following:
Update after the fact: To the best of my knowledge, this information was not made available to the various members of the South Side Forum. The approval of the reading of the minutes at those meetings occur without reading, postings or handouts.

Thanks for the Invite

The LTV Steering Committee extended an invitation to Mark Rauterkus, concerned citizen, for a January 1999 meeting with officials from UPMC, Oxford and the U.R.A. Thank you.

In my opinion, access to the closed steering committee meeting was granted after repeated one-to-one requests for additional information and additional meetings were made to each committee member, the URA and UPMC. Attendance at the meeting was a gesture, as a number of specific requests were not forthcoming before, then or since.
For example, as of Feb 23, a map or site plan has not been forthcoming after repeated requests since November.

Nebbier Than Others

Since November, 1998, investigation, talking and side-line planning has occurred, including the formation of a new coalition for sports, fitness and recreation. Listening comes first as the UPMC plans are revealed, however, it is fair to say that red flags are being waved for the UPMC Plan.

It is disheartening that we all are not on the same page and working for the best interest of the community in these matters. I feel that UPMC, the Pitt Athletic Department, Oxford Development, the URA, the Steelers, our City Councilman, the South Side Planning Forum (perhaps the Mayor) and grass-roots sports and recreation participants are NOT in harmony. Obviously the bigger players can team together and overpower the citizens.
Improved collaboration to enhance every one's position and relationship sounds fine, but serious dialog and effort is necessary. The powers that be are not interested in slowing down their development process to engage.

Disgruntled Nonmember

The South Side Planning folks have much different opinions from myself and those who I'm representing.

Mark Rauterkus does not have a seat at the table with the forum. The fact that I am an outsider to these groups with no official role or capacity granted herein makes a small hurdle compared with the roadblocks of idea input opportunities. The most staggering disappointment to me comes from the Chair of the Planning Forum who wants to distance myself from the process, and sums it up when he said, "Mark, you are being too global!"

Now Swimming Uphill

In Mark's opinion, opposition appears justified for selected aspects of the proposed UPMC Sports Performance compound. Furthermore, opposition to the planning process and its integrity of a dynamic forum to champion a free-flow of ideas is certain.

Global Sticking Points

The biggest sticking point is community access opportunities.

The UPMC plans do not fit into the associated sporting communities:
1. the NCAA,
2. student-athletes in the area, and
3. everyday participants.
The UPMC plans are not fair:
- unjust allocation of resources/assets, and
- decisions grossly favor mega institutions
The UPMC plans are substandard in that better-integrated solutions that stretch our imaginations are possible.

Quotes:

Carrie Harris, South Side Local Development Committee, Forum Member, Steering Commitee, said about the NCAA rule restrictions for member institutions that prohibits professional and college athletes from sharing the same facility at the same time, "That is Their Problem."
Hugh Brannon said at a LTV Site Steering Committee Meeting, "Mark, You're Being Too Global."

Petitions Circulating South Side as of Feb 23

Petition A
Request for a public hearing on the URA's sale of land on the LTV site to UPMC for a Football Compound.
Petition B
City Pool Fees for Adults, Kids and Pending Policies - or lack thereof.
Update: This petition was not submitted to the City Clerk's office. No public hearing is needed as there is no pending legislation and a new aquatics planning process is slated to being with the Parks Department.
Petition C
Save Our Stadium, Univ. of Pittsburgh Student Government to save Pitt Stadium. To sign that petition, go to the sixth-floor of the Wm. Pitt Student Union and go to the reception desk at the Student Goverment office.

Coalition Meeting Where Everyone is Welcomed

The Market House's convened coalition for Sports, Fitness and Recreation welcomes anyone interested to a gathering on Tuesday, March 9, 7:30 pm, and/or 9:00 pm. The meeting will include a presentation and discussion of "The Position Paper for Developments in Pittsburgh and the South Side -- Logical Happenings in the Shadows of PLAN B."

See the Web Site or Send Email for Specifics

Closing Frustrations

It seems that a grant offer from UPMC is climbing in its total amount. UPMC started by offering to build a new ballfield. The ballfield could have been built, so said UPMC officials, on space other than the space slated to be purchased by UPMC. That offer was bogus, and was shot-down on the spot as there is not enough room on the LTV site for a ballfield. The space does not exist. If the space did exist, why would UPMC need to build non-regulation sized fields?

Then UPMC said that the donation of a ballfield could be made in other parts of the South Side. Perhaps an existing ballfield could get an upgrade. Ballfield donations, such as that being considered here would cost about $30K. So, a $30K grant for any fitness and sports location was mentioned by UPMC officials.

Then on Feb 23, 1999, the $30K grant grew to an amount of $75K. This money, seems to me, to be a way to sway the opinions of the concerned citizens.

The offers of "community access opportunities" at the planned UPMC compound are slim and tiny. UPMC knows it, and UPMC can try to buy support with an offer of a grant.

The offer from UPMC can be listened to, for now.

However, the gall of the South Side Planning Forum to even discuss the notion of a role with that grant as some type of funding agent, or even to brokering some type of transactions along with a needs review issick.

Get this: All money for community-based sports and recreation for local citizens needs to go directly from UPMC to the Market House Athletic Association, if not its convened coalition.

Monday, February 22, 1999

SS Planning Forum

The LTV Steering Committee issued a report at a meeting I attended.

The LTV Steering Committee had met twice since the Feb 9 Planning Forum Meeting. On Feb 17 the committee met with Dr. Mulu Birru, Exec. Director of URA to review the planning process being used for the LTV site and discuss current projects and challenges. Dr. Birru reaffirmed the URA's commitment to working on the South Side Planning Forum and the LTV Steering Committee and expressed his confidence in the process.

The committee met again on Feb 22 with representatives from UPMC and IBEW to review the status of their proposals.

UPMC Sports Medicine Complex

It appears that the peices are in place to insure that UPMC will be making payments to the URA at the same rate as commcercial property taxes for as long as the property is owned by them. Further, the URA is committed to adding a covenant to the deed of the property to insure that the future non-profit owners would be under the same arrangement. A letter to this effect has been received and was distributed at the last Forum meeting. The Steering Committee has indicated to the URA and UPMC that it would like to insure tht the final PILOT (payment in leu of taxes) documents reflect these considerations.

UPMC has indicated that it would be open to considering community access for structured uses of the site. That is, the fields could be made available to specific community programs, though a lease or reservation system. The proposed 4 outdoor football fields will be limited to use by the University of Pittsburgh Panthers and Pittsburgh Steelers football teams, however, there are possibilities for uses of the indoor field -- which is full size. UPMC will consider a request from the Forum or another designated community group to run a specific number of programs each year. A group and individual point person would need to be identified to handle this planning. As evidence of the above commitment, UPMC will bring a list of current community programs that use UPMC facilities.

In addition to above, the Steering Committee discussed options for a proposed investment to South Side recreational facilities by UPMC. Ideas will be discussed at the Forum meeting on February 23. The Steering Committee agreed to have a formal response to the offer ready prior to the April 8th URA board meeting, when the project will be presented for final approval.

Also, the URA agreeded to provide an analysis of the job projections for the UPMC use of the portion of the site versus the flex office space use outlined in the master plan.

With regard to the approval process, after the presentation to the Forum on teh 23rd, the URA board would like to vote on accepting a proposal from UPMC at a special board meeting, to be held as early as February 26. The SSLDC's Design Committee will review the project at their March meeting. The project will go before Council for a motion to sell the property in March. On April 8 the URA board would like to vote on the final projet and the financing.

IBEW Complex

The committe also met with the IBEW and their architects to review changes to the design as suggested by the LTV Steering Committee and SSLDC Design Committee. Although the group has elected not to move the parking from the frst level of the building, they have implemented several design enhancements to improve the appearance of the first floor of the building. These include changes to reduce the scale of the front elevation cornice and consideration fo the use of offset brick to break up the surface at street level. IBEW has also agreed to investigate using non-reflective glass on the building and would like to avoid using reflective glass. An East Carson Street entrance to the building has been added, with more development being don t the landscaping of this entrance. The curb cut into the site has been moved to be consistent with the contunuation of Sidney Street.

Other

The Life Sciences building plans and the Final Land Development Plan for sub-district B will be presented to the Forum on March 9.

Saturday, February 20, 1999

The URA's Life-Science Building

Jerry Williams of the URA presented some of the facts at a public meetings.

Much of the speculation and delivery of the information below is not from the URA, but rather is opinion and fuel for in-depth discussions to come.

Ownership

The building is going to be owned by the URA. This building increases the URA's land-lord role to a higher level. The URA already owns many buildings around town such as 200 Ross Street. Some of these building built by and maintained by the URA are viable commercial buildings that should be sold into the free marketplace. The public money is being spent, and this expense needs to be justified.

Building Specifics

45K square foot in size
costs $10.7M
2 stories tall
next to the ugly UPMC-warehouse-distribution site by Stoffer (closer to SS Biz)
located near the Electrical Union building
corner of Sarah Street Extension and East Carson Street
has parking behind the building

Purpose of the Life-Science Building

biomedical incubator
ideal for professors who start a business while keeping their teaching jobs
building to be open around the clock with much work getting done in evenings due to nature of the inventors schedules
flex-office space
shared lobby and entry with rest-rooms in the center of the building.

Traffic

Most of the traffic is going to come from Oakland.
Most of the traffic is going to use the new bridge.
Parking is in the back of the building on a surface lot.
the construction of a parking garage is expected in later phases
Because Sarah Street Extension is not going to cross over the RR tracks, all traffic leaving the building is going to have to go to East Carson Street.
A short cut road from the back of the Life-Science Building across the back of the lot of the IBEW property would allow for cars to avoid East Carson Street.
The decisions to move all of the UPMC Sports Performance compound to the river-side of the RR Tracks, and to NOT build a costly bridge over the RR Tracks, hence splitting the land of the site, is costly to the fate of this building. All traffic into and out of this building might be forced to drive onto a bumper to bumper traffic on East Carson Street. Driving on East Carson Street, even for one-block, only to turn onto the new Gateway Blvd. is not good. That street has gridlock on a daily basis now, with zero development on the LTV site due to folks driving to and from Brentwood, Baldwin, the valley and to and beyond the Saw Mill Run areas.
The lack of a bike way and foot traffic across the bridge is going to greatly hinder this building's success. People will not be able to walk across the bridge from Second Avenue. Nor will people be able to ride a bike from Oakland to this building.
Connections within the site are important so traffic does not need to pour out onto East Carson Street and making gridlock all the way to Station Square.
Connections from one side of the river to the other side of the river for walkers and bikers are important to the success of this building and the entire site. The construction of parking garages is costly and should not occur until after the bridge has been made to pass foot and bike traffic.

Other Points:

Inventors of Sterioids, Andro, Ergo-genic aids, Supplements and masking agents can easily reach the football players for research studies and then in turn, the marketplace, with the drug warehouse, as both are neighbors.
This is the third building to be done by IKM on this site. Another sign of in-breeding and a lack of diversity.
This is NOT a grand landmark building, nor is is as ugly as the existing UPMC Drug Warehouse building either. The building has a long, low, warehouse feel none-the-less.
"To combat that look, we sheared it in half and pulled half down in an offset, using a series of brick and glass facade pannels."
Pannels, without doors, simulate storefront spaces.
Some trees in part of the front.
Smart set back from the street allows for later widening of East Carson Street.

Job Points:

Expect 100 people to work there.
Not new jobs, but more of incubator work expansion jobs.

What is the Real Deal?

The URA folks know who is going to occupy a good portion of this building, but the URA officials declined to comment on who that could be.

High Tech Business Incubators have been build and in operation in other parts of the US since the 1970s. In the early 1980s, Northwestern University had such a building, but it was not a brand-new building. Rather the space was a converted warehouse that was in a part of town behind the college that was able to be gutted and re-used as a high-tech space.

Rehab or Build New Buildings

Why not pick-up a few of the older buildings that are for sale and on the market for many years now in the South Side and convert those into high-tech spaces? The old police station has been sitting on 13th Street for more than a decade. The free market is not going to reclaim that building, and the URA should. The old Emerald Art Glass building is vacant on the South Side. Same too for the old Bingham building. These buildings could serve as flex office space for bio-medical outfits.

Then, when the company starts to take off, the company could build its own building in new space.

The overhead of new building space for a start-up company is suspect. Unless, of course, there is a hidden agenda. Perhaps a specific company or department at a university wants to have the URA build a building and only pay rent to them, dodging the capital and finances.

The URA has asked for a $25M TIF cap for finances on the LTV site. The URA can build a lot of buildings based upon this source of funding.

Comparison Speculation:

I'd love to see an alternative plan put forth where the URA acquires three, vacant buildings in the South Side and does a major rehab on those properties to be used for bio-tech incubator space. In the end, the cost would be much less than what is going to occur in these plans. Furthermore, the benefits would be much greater to the area as well.

Alternative Plans

Let's take the last steps for the development of the Life-Science building, get final approval, and then pause for 12 months. In the pause, let's uncover some alternatives with existing structures on the South Side. Then let's see how much it would cost to renovate those spaces and what issues are discovered. Then let's look to see what other type of developement would be possible for that section of the LTV site.

Perhaps a large community recreation center, like a YMCA or a Jewish Community Center, should be built by the URA on the site that is now slated for the Life-Sciences Building? It would not be possible to retro-fit an existing police station to a large gym space, with locker facilities and with ample parking.

Perhaps an expansion of the retail district is possible on the space? Then the building won't have to be made to look like retail space, but it could be retail space for small business.

Perhaps the demand for bio-tech incubator space is so great that both the rehab of the existing buildings could advance and then the Life-Science building could be built too?

Approval Process Ahead

The Life-Science Building seems to be another example of another project that is expected to get the approval of the LTV Steering Committee and the SS Planning Forum, (of course).

The South Side Forum and Steering Committee is fully justified in approving this project as the spirit of the preliminary plans of past years are being considered. The Life-Science Building has the hope of job creation. The ownership issue is suspect however. The traffic problems are highly suspect too.

City Council could insist that the Life-Science Building be built and opened with a "For Sale Sign" planted firmly in the middle of the front lawn of the building. Go so far as to put up the sign and note a clear asking price as well.

If the building is built and opened and then sold, all the better. Then the money can be turned into other endeavors.

To Pittsburgh Planning Commission

The Life-Science Building is going to be a topic of discussion at the Pittsburgh Planning Commission meeting in early April. The URA is going to submit Final Land Development Plans for subsection B. That includes the three IKM buildings.

Thursday, February 18, 1999

Shared facilities between Pitt and the Steelers, NCAA and NFL -- a rule breaking arrangement

Header

Received: from ncaa-bh.ncaa.org (ncaa-bh.ncaa.org [205.227.50.66]) by sportsurf.net (8.8.5) id PAA26639; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 15:11:49 -0700 (MST)
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by ncaa-bh.ncaa.org (8.8.8/8.6.11) id QAA06452 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 16:11:50 -0600 (CST)
Received: from unknown(10.0.0.4) by ncaa-bh.ncaa.org via smap (4.1)
	id xma006360; Tue, 16 Feb 99 16:10:53 -0600
Received: by NCAA_04 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9)
	id ; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 15:57:20 -0600
Message-ID: <31B3718F1371D1119E4800805F6F209F01EB284F@NCAA_04>
From: "Batson, David" 
To: "'mrauterkus@sportsurf.net'" 
Cc: "Cuka, Kathy" 
Subject: RE: Planning Issues: NCAA & Professional Facilities
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 15:57:19 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-UIDL: a4d3621d299931a17279657477807c83

From: "Batson, David" dbatson@ncaa.org

	Mark,

	Thanks you for the e-mail.

	Question 1 and 2:

	The NCAA National Office does not compile a list of institutions
sharing facilities with a professional team.  You may want to contact the
appropriate professional sports association to see if they can provide such
information.

	Question 3:

	You are correct that the NCAA wants to maintain a line a demarcation
between college athletics and professional sports along with maintaining the
amateur status of the student-athletes by limiting their involvement with
professional teams and agents.  However, legislation permits some limited
involvement between a member institution and a professional sports team such
as permitting a professional team to rent institutional facilities subject
to normal institutional contractual agreements and permitting Institution's
to host and promote an athletics contest between two professional teams as a
fund-raising activity for the institution.  However, the former
Interpretations Committee had determined that the member institution's team
and the professional team may not use the facility jointly at the same time.

	I hope that this information is helpful in your research.





> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Mark Rauterkus [SMTP:mrauterkus@sportsurf.net]
> 
> Sent:	Saturday, February 13, 1999 7:27 AM
> To:	csmrt@ncaa.org
> Subject:	Planning Issues: NCAA & Professional Facilities
> 
>     
> Dear NCAA Enforcement Folks,
> 
> I need some clarifications, please, on some general rules issues about the
> build in measures that are in place to create some distance (firewall, if
> you will) between PROFESSIONAL athletes/organizations and Div. I NCAA
> programs.
> I gave a few calls on the phone to you all last week, bouncing between
> enforcement and membership voice mail boxes-to no satisfaction. Thanks for
> your attention to this email.
> Who am I? This is always one of your first questions-so I'll tell you.
> I'm a publisher of many sports releated titles (books, etc.) as well as
> Internet Journalist-as well as local advocate for some community issues as
> per sports/fitness and such. I'm also leading a non-profit coalition of
> sports agencies in the tri-state area, meeting with school boards and
> such.  So, I'm not affiliated with any NCAA member institution-and it is
> okay to treat me as a media person as what is discovered will be reported
> upon in different position papers and perhaps news releases or public
> committee meetings.
> Mark Rauterkus, 412-481-2540
> 108 South 12th Street
> Pittsburgh, PA 15203-1226
> email: mrauterkus@sportsurf.net
> 
> 
> Questions:
> 1.	What Div. I football programs share PRACTICE FACILITIES on a day to
> day basis with PROFESSIONAL (NFL) FOOTBALL Teams?  Are there any?
> 
> 
> 2.	We realize that there are some NCAA programs that share stadiums
> with pro teams:
> 	Tampa Bay NFL & Univ. of South Florida
> 	Army/Navy Game at Veterans Stadium
> 	Rutgers Univ. at Meadowlands
> 
> What others am I missing? 
> 
> 3.	We realize that there are some strong rules in place with NCAA
> institutions to distance themselves, their athletes and even the recrits
> from PRO teams, agents, and such. With this in mind-does it make sense to
> share practice facilities on a day to day basis with pros and college
> athletes? Would it be permitted or not by the NCAA?
> 
> Thanks.
> Mark Rauterkus
> 412-481-2540
> mrauterkus@sportsurf.net

Wednesday, February 17, 1999

Mark to City Council

Mentions Before City Council on February 17, 1999

Appreciation:

The opportunity to address the council is appreciated. May this be a first step as some pressing issues loom large.

Highlight:

I'm here to wave a flags of concern about UPMC buying nearly 30 acres of property from the URA at the heart of the LTV site.

A hightened awareness;
some extra nudging throughout the system for the next couple weeks;
and then around March 1st -- the request is for your individual and collective brain power to consider our pending POSITION PAPER.

Introduction:

My nane is Mark Rauterkus. I live in the city on the South Side. Councilman Ricciardi represents our neighborhood with great dilligence and insight.

Councilman Riccciardi and I are both are parenting 4-year old children. My second is one. I'm a stay at home dad.

FWIW, My wife is a professor who works in the Health Sciences. We've been here and together for 9 years after meeting Chicago. I have family roots in Allegheny County.

Sports Connection & Profession

Sports, recreation, and fitness my entire career. I've coached swimming in six states from Park Districts to IVY League. Travels and work perspectives include Colorado Springss' USA's Olympic Training Center, the Australian Institute of Sports, the UK.

I've been an independent publisher of sports magazines in mid-west, and then LA. Then I turned to doing books and multi-media titles from volleyball, water polo, weight lifting, sports psych, competitive swimming, triathlon-ing -- even sports philosophy.

That's the concerned citizen. Next comes the political advocate and knowledge base organizer. As part of the South Side Markethouse Athletic Association, we're a booster group that runs a lot of programs with City Parks, we convening a non-profit coalition. We're organizing, investigating, making priorities, and challenging people to integrate various opportunities -- within sports, fitness, and community. These efforts need some additional grass-roots input from other concerned people in these areas. We welcome ideas and input from anyone.

Send email to: backyard@sportsurf.net --- or, our meeting schedule is posted in the South Pgh Reporter -- or at the Markethouse.

The outcome of these efforts is an offering of some creative solutions -- detailed in a POSITION PAPER.

The flags of concerns with UPMC and the URA at the LTV site. ----
Simply put -- We should be scratching to reach our potential...

I'm a positive person.
Yes, this is a 25-30 Million $ development.
Yes, bulldozers and graders are already pushing dirt around the site today.
Yes, another public meeting is slated for next week --- But, I can't get a site plan out of the people at Pitt or the URA.

First worry

In November the URA inked a deal for a 90-day open discussion period -- and I'm not satisfied at all with that open-ness.

The South Side has a Planning Forum -- and a Steering Committee --- but mind you, they're charter stipulates a concensus. With one disenting vote --- they are beached. When push comes to shove, by committee -- and with a consensus -- they can change a lightbulb.

I salute them for that accomplishment.

When your only tool is a hammer --- everything tends to look like a nail. They have been given a "rubber stamp."

They can change a light bulb. And they've been doing it for a long time -- and things are fine. They work hard and are goof folks.

Our worry is not the ligh-bulb -- but it is finding the switch.

Who is going to throw the switch and make sure it goes in the right direction. We need a switch to the kids, the graduates, the people. The folks in the community are our prime asset -- and they need attention.

Dive In Example

On 10th Street in the South Side -- we've got the Oliver Bath House -- the only indoor pool that the city operates. I've been there hundreds of times. That facility served us well. The Bath House is NOT ADA compliant.

Furthermore -- on the same block we are going to have two new neighbors -- a new Comfort Suites Hotel and a Red-Roof Inn-like hotel complex is about to start it construction. They are building a pool too.

Pittsburgh should not be in the only city in the world to have two terrible pools confined to the same city block.

Why does the developer have to put up two nice hotels -- and wedge in the plans a new kidney shapped hotel pool, plunk in a couple exercise bikes in the corner -- all next to (litterally touching against) our relic --- The OLIVER Bath House.

We need to pull some strings on a more "global" level -- more vision.

How about a nicer 8-lane adult lap pool to serve the guest, and our seniors -- open 24 hours a day, staffed by the city guards, -- quid pro quo -- so everyone wins. Then the bathhouse can be a wonderful re-positioned use -- like a grand-concourse resteraunt, ball-room, perhaps.

But, we've got something even better that this in our Position Paper.

The sky box fans, the game-day ball-players seem to be taken care of. Seems Dr. Fredie Fu wants to work his magic on injured gladiators of the gridiorn so we can keep the point-spread respectable --- but there is a higher calling about to come forth, and I hope to do more integrating.

so we can shine a brighter light -- in certain critial spaces for our kids and citizens.

We'd love a brainstorming session with the (NEW) director of Parks, Can we get an audience with the director of the URA -- and perhaps some URA board members?

Consider better integration with:

the Pgh. Public School Board and Administration

the County, and

the grass-roots players, organizers and those in the sports participation field.

To Pitt / UPMC say: #1. community access issues are important -- and #2, a secluded compound behind a fence of arrogance is NOT going to FLY here.

Pitt already screwed up the development and building of an indoor football practice facility this decade. That's proof enough that they have trouble changing light-bulbs.

We are looking to stretch our potential -- from here on in --- and wellness counts big time. --- And, the roads that UPMC can pave on URA lands -- as a TIFF -- well it can wait if need be so we can do it right. I'd rather have intermural fields move the South Side -- and let the PITT football team can play in its indoor practice fields -- or else on the grass that surrounds the Cathedral of Learning. The rugby and lacross players can come on down.

PS --- stop

Design Competition -- Yet alone Local Consultant

No design competition, and the developer refutes the planning documents. Goes counter to "flex-office space" and "job creation" Mr. James Goldman, local, -- retainer. PS2 Jay, moved to W.VA. Polo - 4th River

----

Background and Backyard web site:

The Citizen Call to City Council for a Public Hearing

Signatures Submitted

A wide range of people from many sections in the city choose to sign the petition to request the public hearing. Pettitions were passed around at the University of Pittsburgh, at the South Side Market House and at a high-tech firm, US Web Pittsburgh.

Regional Issue

This issue is important as the proposed plans play on the city-wide stage and have regional consequences. The impact of these decisions goes beyond the South Side to Oakland (looses the day-to-day activities of the football team at Pitt and some 800+/- jobs) to the North Side (looses the day-to-day activities of the Steelers football team and the Steelers' corporate headquarters) and to all the corners of the city. The happenings on the LTV site can set the stage for later efforts at the 200+ acre Hazelwood site, Nine-Mile Run and other URA developments. What happens on the South Side, and why it happens, impacts many corners of the city.

Because of the regional and city-wide impact, it is most important for all the members of city council to give the plans and the alternatives careful consideration with an open minded approach.

Many people who live outside the city expressed and interest to sign the petition, but could not do so because of the stipulated rules. Some would like to speak at the public hearing.

Philosophy, Policy and Planning

Plan B Fallout

There is a natural fallout and aftermath of Plan B.
The training facilities took a back-seat to the discussion of game-day facilities.
The scope of focus widens to training, citizens and institutions.
There is much to do beyond the new building issues and corporate convention center scheduling. Now it is time to give a care about the players who are NOT under professional contracts with agents.

Advanced Discussions in Meaningful Ways

People need to take the microphone to make public statements and public promises on many issues that circle these plans.

Let's wait and see who says what when the NCAA compliance officers prohibit the sharing of the same facility at the same time with professional athletes, as clearly stated in the NCAA Manuals.

Let's wait and see what amount of money UPMC wants to grant to the South Side athletes.

Prelude to City Council's Public Hearing and Vote

Much work and education should be slated with the help of City Council before the formal public hearing even occurs.

Telivised Round Table Discussions Are Welcomed

Case in point, the present location of Dr. Freddie Fu's Sports Medicine office includes a therapy pool. The aquatic's pool, built into an existing building on Baum Blvd., and the extensive remodeling for Sports Medicine occurred in 1990. Seemingly, the hydro-therapy pool doesn't fit its present location and reportedly is constantly under reapair. UPMC remodeled the building at considerable costs. To retrofit and accomidate specialized sports equipment, i.e., swimming pools, is both new and abandoned properties is expensive. Let's ponder the plans and see if UPMC is going to repeat past mistakes like the ones at the existing Sports Medicine offices or like the ones at its indoor football practice facilities, The Cost Center.

Video Tape and Broadcast the URA Board Meeting

I'd like to request the broadcasting of a number of meetings before the public hearing.

Give and Take Is Needed For Excellent Planning

A lot of give and take is needed to craft philosophies and to uncover both the basics and the spectacular. There isn't any give and take within the process with the minute expections of:

The URA Director gets asked some questions by City Council at Working Meetings on Wednesdays.
The URA Board gets together to sign-off on the projects that the staff submits.
Tame community groups are tickled with tidbits and ponder window-dressing design conerns.

Pitt already built an indoor football practice facility in the 90s. Let's let them use that one for a while longer.

License Plates, made my those in prisons

WWW.STATE.PA.US

http://www.dot.state.pa.us/penndot/railway.nsf/webcast?readform

On Feb. 17, 1999, Gov. Tom Ridge unveiled a new look with a website address for the Pennsylvania license plate. Our Commonwealth kicks into high gear for a 'New Pennsylvania.' With our web address, a strong and positive signal says that Pennsylvania is high tech, high energy and ready for the new millennium.

Our website is a gateway to important information for tourists, motorists, families, employers and students. "People who may someday visit or even move here."

What about the people that already live here! What about the South Siders who have complained for years about the over-crowded parking problems? What about the people who want to develop new businesses with new technologies? The people in our area don't have the props from the locals in high-tech start-ups and technology insights, and we need a Passion Park, a small-business convention center, a high-tech hang-out.

The state replace the 9 million license plates over a three-years - at no cost to motorists, ha, ha, ha. Who pays, the taxpayers. Gee, some of them might be motorist too.

Pennsylvania's $1.9 billion-a-year Motor License Fund will absorb the cost of the license-plate replacement, expected to total about $32 million. PennDOT will not charge motorists a fee for the new license plate unless they want to buy one before their scheduled replacement time. Motorists who want a new plate sooner will pay $7.50.

Gov. Ridge, let's tap into the Motor License Fund to build Passion Park. It is going to cost less than $10 million. Correctional Industries will manufacture the new license plates using reflective-sheeting technology, resulting in greater visibility. The existing plates use a "beads-on-paint" system, in which only the numbers and letters, not the background, are reflective. Once completed, PennDOT expects the statewide license plate replacement to result in a 4 percent to 5 percent increase in vehicle registrations. This is because motorists must have a valid registration to receive the new license plate from PennDOT. PennDOT estimates this boost in registration fees would generate about $13.8 million a year - more than covering the cost of the re-issuance within three years.

PA License Plates

WWW.STATE.PA.US

http://www.dot.state.pa.us/penndot/railway.nsf/webcast?readform

Our website is a gateway to important information for tourists, motorists, families, employers and students. "People who may someday visit or even move here."

The state replace the 9 million license plates over a three-years - at no cost to motorists, ha, ha, ha. Who pays, the taxpayers. Gee, some of them might be motorist too.

Tuesday, February 16, 1999

South Vo Tech event

South Vo Tech to Host Regional Competition

South Vocational Technical High School is hosting the regional competition for industrial arts students in grades 11 and 12 on Tuesday, February 16, 1999, 9 to 11 a.m. The competition, which also includes state and national meets, is sponsored through VICA (Vocational Industrial Clubs of America).

Students from Pittsburgh Public Schools will compete against students from programs in Western Pennsylvania Career and Technical Centers, including Somerset, Green, North Fayette, Fayette, Central Westmoreland, Western Area and Mon Valley.

Superintendent of Schools Dale E. Frederick said the competition is held in Pittsburgh once every eight years. "We are proud to host this activity for students at our vocational education magnet school," he said. "Students will have the opportunity to demonstrate their leadership and applied skills in a variety of technical concentrations such as Cosmetology, Commercial Baking, Sheet Metal and Welding.

Many of these areas have incorporated computer technology. Student projects will be judged by community volunteers. First place winners advance to the state competition in the Spring along with other areas that are classified as "byes" and automatically qualify for the state meet.