Yes. What they found in Pittsburgh was that they maintained the revenue and acquired the needed revenue. Many people actually had a reduced tax. The heavy landowners who weren't using the land were taxed more.
In The Wall Street Journal video I referred to, they said there were thousands of unused lots in the city of New York, and there was no incentive for those people to develop those lots. They were just waiting for those lands to appreciate. That tax would be much higher on those unused lots. It would make it a poor investment, and they would sell those to someone who would develop them.