ShareThis Page
Letter to the editor: East Liberty hostage situation |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: East Liberty hostage situation

Letter To The Editor
| Friday, June 1, 2018 8:57 p.m

If the Peduto administration was looking for a smoking-gun piece of evidence to justify initiating eminent domain proceedings against LG Realty Advisors to take control of Penn Plaza and put an end to this embarrassing mess, this is it.

After the most recent Pittsburgh Planning Commission hearing, attorney Jonathan Kamin, who represents Pennley Park, said LG Realty would sue again or allow the property to “remain fallow” if plans were not approved ( “Pittsburgh planning board approves design for East Liberty’s Penn Plaza project” ).

In other words, if LG Realty doesn’t get its way, which involves building a massive project that doesn’t replace lost housing, does very little to repair the street grid wrecked by urban renewal, destroys the charming character of Enright Parklet, and adds to the oversupply of office and retail supply in East Liberty, then the company plans to leave the site empty.

When a developer publicly threatens to hold an important city property hostage as a negotiating tactic, it means it is not acting in good faith and has no concern for the well-being of the neighborhood or its residents.

Josh Clark


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.