SkyscraperPage Forum - PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

Viewing Page 45 of 197

SkyscraperPage Forum (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/index.php)

- City Compilations (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=87)

- - PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=196266)

http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburg...mono-plan.html

Quote:

RIDC shows off new Almono plan

Pittsburgh Business Times by Tim Schooley, Reporter
Date: Thursday, April 19, 2012, 2:12pm EDT - Last Modified: Thursday, April 19, 2012, 2:33pm EDT

http://assets.bizjournals.com/pittsb...opment.jpg?v=1

The development team for the 178-acre former J&L steel mill site in Hazelwood debuted their new master plan for the brownfield redevelopment to the real estate community Thursday, billing it as perhaps the region’s first true riverfront project.

“It’s going to be a front door on the riverfront,” said Ken Doyno, a principal for Rothschild Doyno Collaborative, the planning firm for the project. “We don’t actually have riverfront development that accomplishes that.”

Doyno was joined by Don Smith, president of the Regional Industrial Development Corporation of Southwestern Pennsylvania, and Rob Stephany, the former executive director of the city’s Urban Redevelopment Authority now with the Heinz Endowments, to present the plan at a breakfast meeting of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties at the Omni William Penn Hotel. RIDC is the manager of the property on behalf of its owner, Almono Partners, a collection of four local foundations -- Heinz, Benedum, McCune and R.K. Mellon -- who bought the former mill site in 2001 for $10 million in order to ensure a quality redevelopment, a plan which has taken more than 12 years to achieve.

Doyno and Smith detailed a master plan comprised of four separate phases:

Riverview, a high-density mixed use district on the narrowest part of the site closest to Oakland and Downtown;

a central green area designed around a restored wheel house;

an eco-tech park, focusing on light industrial around a re purposed mill structure;

Hazelwood Flats, a new residential neighborhood that would seek to connect with both the established Hazelwood neighborhood as well as the riverfront.

Smith noted the master plan was the third one for the site, which became necessary because the plans for the Mon-Fayette Expressway which was expected to use the site, have fallen through while the rail line once slated to stop running through the Almono site continues to use its established line there.

While the site has established Act II environmental clearance, Smith said the site is expected to see more infrastructure work later this year, including building new roads to run through the site.

“We have a program in place to make the land developable,” he said. “Right now, it’s not.”

In total, the new plan proposes 691,645 square feet of industrial space, more than 2.1 million of mixed-use space and 1,320 new homes.

After meeting with various organizations in Hazelwood and beyond more than eight times over the new master plan, Smith suggested the project is beginning to move into marketing mode.

Noting that land is available to acquire at the site for between $150,000 and $250,000 per acre, Smith put out the invitation for inquiries from interested developers.

“There’s no presumption that RIDC is going to develop this,” he said.

I can't believe nobody here is talking about the historic population gain experienced by the Pittsburgh Metropolitan Area (and Allegheny County in particular) from 2010-2011 according to the Census Estimates released a couple weeks ago.

Metro Pittsburgh started growing again a few years ago after decades of almost uninterrupted population loss, and a gain of 3,700 year-over-year for the MSA is the largest gain yet. As Pittsburgh is still unfortunately in "last place" amongst major metros in the volume of international migrants... and Pittsburgh is the only major metro that experiences more deaths than births... the population gain is driven by strong domestic in-migration that overcame the birth deficit. 3,700 may seem meager compared to other regions' gains, but it is a testament to how successful Pittsburgh is becoming at attracting new residents from elsewhere in the US. In fact, Pittsburgh is now experiencing the highest per-capita rate of net in-migration amongst any major metro in the North (excepting the federal jobs machine of DC).

Of particular interest is that Pittsburgh MSA's job growth is now primarily driven by the core county of Allegheny. Overall growth was dragged down by some of the outlying suburban counties. However, even the population losers were on the plus side of domestic migration. Of the 7 MSA counties, only tiny, rural Armstrong posted net domestic out-migration.

This is a remarkable turnaround for the region. Greater Pittsburgh probably hasn't seen net domestic in-migration since the 1920s.

Here's the article from the Post-Gazette... followed by numbers:

http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/12096/1221915-455.stm

Quote:

Region's population turnaround has lasted and grown

Relative strength of economy a cause

Thursday, April 05, 2012
By Gary Rotstein, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

It wasn't long ago that Allegheny County was a drag on the region's population.

Numbers being released today by the U.S. Census Bureau show the exact opposite now to be true, with the county and Pittsburgh metropolitan area apparently in the midst of their healthiest population trend in decades.

The first report since the official April 1, 2010, census of Americans estimated that the population of the seven-county metro area increased by 3,461 between that head count and July 1, 2011. The metropolitan area's population was pegged at 2,359,746. Allegheny County did even better, with an estimated increase of 3,718 over those 15 months, to 1,227,066.

Such increases are small compared with most urban areas around the country, but they take on a positive shine locally when contrasted with the past half-century of sustained population losses. It was only between 2009 and 2010 that the first slight uptick began to emerge in estimates for the region and its hub county, and the new numbers suggest the turnaround has lasted and grown stronger.

"I'm not surprised by it at all," said Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald, when told of the numbers. "There's a lot of growth going on in the economy that's borne out by the unemployment statistics and jobs numbers, and that typically is followed by population. ... We could see it had turned, and I think it's going to continue to turn, because the urban core -- the county itself -- is desirable again."

When broken down by the components of population change -- births and deaths and migration -- it was clear that for both the county and region the main difference from the past is that more people are moving in from outside the area than leaving.

That net migration gain is assumed to result from the relative strength of the Pittsburgh area's economy in recent years. The seven-county local unemployment rate of 6.7 percent in February compared to Pennsylvania's rate of 7.6 percent and a national rate of 8.3 percent, a pattern that has favored the local area for five-plus years.

Allegheny County's status as a net acquirer of people is the biggest change taking place in the regional population. It had been common in recent decades for Butler and Washington counties to gain residents, as they did again between 2010 and 2011, but it has been rarer -- or nonexistent -- for many years in Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Fayette and Westmoreland counties.

Just five years earlier, when the census estimates showed a regional loss of 10,895 people between 2005 and 2006, Allegheny County's own decrease was responsible for 9,625 of that drop.

Mr. Fitzgerald said he's aware of both large and small employers recently adding jobs, a particular boost when considering the increasing number of students attending colleges within the county and interested in staying here after graduation -- but only if career opportunities exist.

David Martin -- a Realtor, investment adviser and lending specialist in the North Hills since 1987 -- said the population numbers confirm what he has been seeing. Just Wednesday, he was dealing with three different households recently returning to Allegheny County from Florida for varying economic and family reasons.

"We had an entire generation that had to leave because of the mills closing," Mr. Martin noted. "Now people see how pretty cool this place is. The pace here is slower, the success is better and the number of movies being made here in Pittsburgh doesn't hurt our ambassadorship. There's a number of strands that build the rope."

Chris Briem, a University of Pittsburgh demographer and regional economist, pointed to numbers suggesting it may have been the 1920s since the last time Allegheny County had any sustained period of more people moving in than moving out. Consistently for decades, it has lost people to both adjacent counties and distant cities.

He said it's possible that the county and region are in the early stages of a long-term trend of modest growth, which could have been viewed as inevitable because the dire manufacturing setbacks that caused population losses among the worst in the nation had dimmed as a factor.

"The question is what happens as the nation as a whole moves past the recession, as clearly a lot more job gains will happen elsewhere," he said.

Gary Rotstein: grotstein@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1255.

...

Pittsburgh MSA

2010: 2,356,285
2011: 2,359,746
Numerical difference: +3,461
Percent difference: +0.1%

Quote:

Originally Posted by DBR96A

Here's how the counties in the Pittsburgh MSA shake out individually...

Allegheny County

2010: 1,223,348
2011: 1,227,066
Change: +3,718

Armstrong County

2010: 68,941
2011: 68,568
Change: -373

Beaver County

2010: 170,539
2011: 170,414
Change: -125

Butler County

2010: 183,862
2011: 184,848
Change: +986

Fayette County

2010: 136,606
2011: 136,097
Change: -509

Washington County

2010: 207,820
2011: 208,282
Change: +462

Westmoreland County

2010: 365,169
2011: 364,471
Change: -698

Pittsburgh MSA

2010: 2,356,285
2011: 2,359,746
Change: +3,461

Pittsburgh MSA (minus Allegheny County)

2010: 1,132,937
2011: 1,132,680
Change: -257

...

Components of Population Change for Metro Pittsburgh

Corresponding annual rates under raw numbers

Allegheny County

2011: 1,227,066
Change: +3,718
Rate: 1.8

Natural Increase: -726
Rate: -0.6
Births: 16,194
Rate: 10.5
Deaths: 16,920
Rate: 11.1

Net Migration: 4,524
Rate: 2.4
Domestic: 2,868
Rate: 1.3
International: 1,656
Rate: 1.1

Armstrong County

2011: 68,568
Change: -373
Rate: -4.7

Natural Increase: -246
Rate: -2.9
Births: 853
Rate: 9.9
Deaths: 1,099
Rate: 12.8

Net Migration: -121
Rate: -1.8
Domestic: -150
Rate: -2.1
International: 29
Rate: 0.3

Beaver County

2011: 170,414
Change: -125
Rate: -1.7

Natural Increase: -416
Rate: -2.0
Births: 2,158
Rate: 10.1
Deaths: 2,574
Rate: 12.1

Net Migration: 306
Rate: 0.4
Domestic: 287
Rate: 0.3
International: 19
Rate: 0.1

Butler County

2011: 184,848
Change: +986
Rate: 4.4

Natural Increase: 15
Rate: 0.0
Births: 2,238
Rate: 9.7
Deaths: 2,223
Rate: 9.7

Net Migration: 993
Rate: 4.5
Domestic: 947
Rate: 4.3
International: 46
Rate: 0.1

Fayette County

2011: 136,097
Change: -509
Rate: -2.9

Natural Increase: -618
Rate: -3.6
Births: 1,662
Rate: 9.8
Deaths: 2,280
Rate: 13.4

Net Migration: 125 :eek:
Rate: 0.7
Domestic: 74
Rate: 0.4
International: 51
Rate: 0.3

Washington County

2011: 208,282
Change: 462
Rate: 1.8

Natural Increase: -532
Rate: -2.1
Births: 2,530
Rate: 9.7
Deaths: 3,062
Rate: 11.8

Net Migration: 1,007
Rate: 3.9
Domestic: 1,006
Rate: 4.0
International: 1
Rate: 0.0

Westmoreland County

2011: 364,471
Change: -698
Rate: -1.7

Natural Increase: -1,341
Rate: -3.0
Births: 4,064
Rate: 8.9
Deaths: 5,405
Rate: 11.9

Net Migration: 679
Rate: 1.4
Domestic: 676
Rate: 1.5
International: 3
Rate: -0.1

Pittsburgh MSA

2011: 2,359,746
Change: +3,461

Natural Increase: -3,864
Births: 29,699
Deaths: 33,563

Net Migration: 7,513
Domestic: 5,708
International: 1,805

...

Let's take a look at the populations of some nearby areas and determine the growth for different regional units...

New Castle Micropolitan Area

2010: 91,108
2011: 90,535
Change: -537

So this gives us the CSA

Pittsburgh CSA

2010: 2,447,393
2011: 2,450,281
Change: +2,888

Population growth for the CSA will probably lag behind the MSA for the foreseeable future due to Lawrence County's weakness.

...

Now let's take a look at the Pittsburgh Designated Market Area... which is our "media market".
Media in Pittsburgh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pittsburgh CSA

2010: 2,447,393
2011: 2,450,281
Change: +2,888

+ the Morgantown, WV MSA... which ranked amongst the top 50 fastest growing MSAs this year with 2% growth

Monongalia County, WV

2010: 96,189
2011: 98,528
Change: +2,339

Preston County, WV

2010: 33,520
2011: 33,723
Change: +203

Morgantown, WV MSA

2010: 129,709
2011: 132,251
Change: +2,542

Now we'll add the rest of the counties...

Garrett County, MD

2010: 30,097
2011: 30,051
Change: -46

Clarion County

2010: 39,988
2011: 40,013
Change: +25

Greene County

2010: 38,686
2011: 38,623
Change: -63

Indiana County

2010: 88,880
2011: 89,298
Change: +418

Venango County

2010: 54,984
2011: 54,683
Change: -301

that gives us...

Pittsburgh DMA

2010: 2,828,737
2011: 2,835,200
Change: +6,463

...

Now let's check out the Pittsburgh Economic Area...

This measure includes the 10-county region served by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (Pittsburgh CSA + Greene + Indiana), Metro Weirton-Steubenville, Metro Wheeling and a few other counties in OH and WV.

The Bureau of Economic Analysis defines Economic Areas as metropolitan or micropolitan areas that serve as regional centers of economic activity and the counties that are economically related to the nodes.

Here goes...

10 county Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission region

2010: 2,574,959
2011: 2,578,202
Change: +3,243

Now we'll add the components of Weirton-Steubenville MSA

Jefferson County, OH

2010: 69,709
2011: 68,828
Change: -881

Brooke County, WV

2010: 24,069
2011: 23,844
Change: -225

Hancock County, WV

2010: 30,676
2011: 30,571
Change: -105

Weirton-Steubenville MSA

2010: 124,454
2011: 123,243
Change: -1,221

Now the Wheeling MSA...

Belmont County, OH

2010: 70,400
2011: 70,151
Change: -249

Marshall County, WV

2010: 33,107
2011: 32,800
Change: -307

Ohio County, WV

2010: 44,443
2011: 44,246
Change: -197

Wheeling MSA

2010: 147,950
2011: 147,197
Change: -753

...and the three leftover counties...

Monroe County, OH

2010: 14,642
2011: 14,585
Change: -57

Tyler County, WV

2010: 9,208
2011: 9,121
Change: -87

Wetzel County, WV

2010: 16,583
2011: 16,351
Change: -232

Add it all up...

Pittsburgh Economic Area

2010: 2,887,796
2011: 2,888,699
Change: +903

...

Let's take a look at some of the Metropolitan Areas near Pittsburgh:

Erie, PA MSA

2010: 280,566
2011: 280,985
Change: +419

Johnstown, PA MSA

2010: 143,679
2011: 143,728
Change: +49

:eek:

Altoona, PA MSA

2010: 127,089
2011: 127,099
Change: +10

State College, PA MSA

2010: 153,990
2011: 154,772
Change: +782

All metros in the western half of Pennsylvania grew! :ok:

Cumberland, MD MSA

2010: 103,299
2011: 102,884
Change: -415

Morgantown, WV MSA

2010: 129,709
2011: 132,251
Change: +2,542

Weirton-Steubenville MSA

2010: 124,454
2011: 123,243
Change: -1,221

Wheeling MSA

2010: 147,950
2011: 147,197
Change: -753

Youngstown-Warren, OH-PA MSA

2010: 565,773
2011: 562,739
Change: -3,034

Canton-Massilon, OH MSA

2010: 404,422
2011: 403,869
Change: -553

Akron, OH MSA

2010: 703,200
2011: 701,456
Change: -1,744

Cleveland, OH MSA

2010: 2,077,240
2011: 2,068,283
Change: -8,957

...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6cYitR0sRi...pril052012.JPG

Something I came across. It's basically a marketing tool for Bakery Square 2.0 which is interesting enough. They seem pretty bullish on it, and having endorsements from Nordy and Cohon certainly helps.

But what really caught my attention were some pretty awesome aerial shots. Definitely some angles I've never seen before. I especially like the East End flyover around 4:08.

http://vimeo.com/40463837

Yes the estimates provide some great news, particularly for Allegheny county.
The fact that it's Allegheny county is great news in itself.

Add to that it has to overcome natural loss, while many metros ride on natural gain is amazing.

It's interesting that Butler which has been growing for decades still has a deaths close to births.

Hopefully Westmoreland can get over that fence. It's frustrating that it has had positve (albeit small) migration, but still has a net loss.

In any case, let's hope that this is the truly the beginning to a trend where Allegheny posts even better gains and bigger int'l gains and Westmoreland and the others see a little bit more significant gains.

I honestly don't see much changing New Castle/Lawence Cty anytime soon nor the Steubenville-Weirton metro. Even with the shale jobs, maybe losses will be more contained, but the depth of problems is serious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghost1454 (Post 5672131)

So, dcesar... how exactly did apartment hunting bring you to the top of USX? Is there some residential conversion going on I didn't know about ;)

Not quite. Called in a favor while in the building for work. Needless to say the views up there are spectacular. UPMC occupies the 62nd floor where a restaurant once stood and the floors above it contain equipment. The owners have not interest space/interest in any further development. Any modifications to the roof area would require millions $ = no ROI. The roof has a cool old flight control station which was used for the helicopter landing pad.

Looking forward to moving to Pitt.... The city has a lot of great things going for it but I will say that some work needs to be done in the area of connectivity. Not just transit but also pedestrian.... For example, cultural district to strip district or downtown/station square to south side. They are so close yet feel so divided... Walking or biking between them is not pleasant.

I understand the geographical constraints PGH faces and know they are different cities but check out what IND did to allow for a cohesive / connected urban core via the cultural trail http://www.indyculturaltrail.org/images-videos.html and georgia street http://www.indy.gov/egov/city/dpw/re...s-project.aspx

I do like the river trails in Pittsburgh but they don't serve the purpose of welcoming visitors and connecting neighborhoods while spurring redevelopment and small businesses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeneW (Post 5672950)

I suppose the Consol Energy Center is an efficient space for games but it's just a horribly bland design. It just looks like a suburban BestBuy from the outside. The Civic Arena had some issues but it was an iconic landmark.

That's a bit harsh. I haven't seen any Best Buys with 300 foot long, 5 story tall curtain walls. You can argue that the color of the brickwork is bland, but I don't have a problem with it.

Civic Arena definitely had a unique look and I would have preferred it be returned to its original purpose as a concert hall, but the property was too valuable for that and it created a big disconnect between the front end of the Hill District and downtown.

Quote:

UPMC occupies the 62nd floor where a restaurant once stood

The "Top of the Triangle" restaurant I think was there from the building's opening (or close to it) until about 10 years ago.

The renderings for the Hazelwood site are really encouraging.. looks like it's going to be denser than the PTC and more diverse & functional than SSW.

In regards to the CEC- I like the arena overall. It's certainly not as iconic as the Civic Arena, but it's not meant to be. It utilizes an awkwardly shaped lot nicely, and was built right into the hillside. I think it will succeed where the Civic Arena failed- spurring neighborhood development rather than retarding it. And the inside is gorgeous and state-of-the-art.

One of my favorite things about Consol Energy Center is how they kept that beautiful historic church next to it (although the adjoining Catholic school was demolished). I love the way CEC is tucked into that lot... it has a much smaller, and more appropriately urban, footprint than the Civic Arena monstrosity that wiped out an entire neighborhood and severed Downtown's connectivity to adjoining districts.

Who cares what CEC's roof looks like from the air? I love walking up Fifth Ave. and seeing that huge glass curtain wall. I love that there are street-level retail spaces built into the arena. And the actual function of the arena... the interior space... is infinitely superior to clunky, decrepit Civic Arena.

I can't believe we're still having this conversation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brentsters (Post 5673458)

Nordy's voice sounds like a robot. Makes me laugh so hard. lol

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evergrey (Post 5674517)

Not sure what's going on in this one... almost looks agricultural!
http://www.rdarch.com/images/projects_alm_lar_10.jpg

I'm purely speculating, but I seem to recall awhile ago that CMU wanted some open land in the development to play with their 'Robot City' project, which would utilize their robots to do work like landscaping. Considering they're currently basing it out of the old rail building and that's what appears here, perhaps this made the final cut of the plan?

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt.../s_792277.html

Quote:

Tight North Shore parking clue to connector's popularity

By Tom Fontaine, PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Saturday, April 21, 2012

Port Authority of Allegheny County won't say how many people have used the $517 million North Shore Connector since the light-rail extension opened a month ago, but signs around the North Shore show ridership is robust.

"Now I have to go up to at least the eighth floor to find a parking spot in the mornings. I used to get one by the fifth," said Oakmont commuter Marty Kennedy, 50, who works at ROOT Sports and parks in the 10-story West General Robinson Street Garage above the new North Side Station.

The Pittsburgh Stadium Authority's 1,321-space garage, built for $28.9 million, has been a target of criticism since it opened in 2006 because of low occupancy. The authority said in December that debt payments exceeded parking revenue since the garage opened, with the average occupancy rate about 68 percent.

Today average weekday occupancy is about 95 percent, said Alco Parking President Merrill Stabile, who manages the garage. Signs reading, "Garage full, leases only," have been placed outside garage entrances at least three times a week since the connector's March 25 opening, he said.

A check of the lot one afternoon this week showed just 33 spaces available. No special events were in progress on the North Shore to inflate occupancy.

"We're very pleased with how well it's been going," Stabile said.

"These are people who work Downtown in the (Golden) Triangle," he said, noting there are no new ventures in the North Side to account for the change.

In December, Alco and the Stadium Authority reached a three-year deal with the Port Authority to provide a $160,000 subsidy to make rides free between Downtown and the North Side Station in the connector's first year of operation, and $5,000 on top of the base payment in each of the subsequent two years.

The Steelers and Rivers Casino reached a similar deal in relation to Allegheny Station at North Shore Drive and Reedsdale Street, ensuring free T rides in all of the North Shore and Downtown.

The Stadium Authority also lowered all-day parking rates to $6 from $8, making them less than half of the average cost of parking Downtown, where all-day garage rates are about $14. All-day rates for surface lots Alco owns surrounding the West General Robinson garage also are $6.

Stabile said North Shore lots still have 700 to 800 available spaces on an average weekday, about the same as before the connector opened.

"I don't want to discourage people from coming over to the North Shore because they think there's no longer any room to park," he said.

About 70 to 80 commuters a day use the Carnegie Science Center's 250-space lot next to Allegheny Station, said center spokeswoman Susan Zimecki. All-day rates there are $6.

When asked how many commuters used the lot before the connector opened, Zimecki said, "Oh, like zero." Instead, the center used the lot for overflow parking.

Community College of Allegheny County students and employees use the connector to get to and from the North Side campus, said spokeswoman Elizabeth Johnston. She could not provide statistics but said, "Every time I go by (Allegheny Station), it seems like there are 25 students walking up the hill" toward the campus. She said she drives to work.

Port Authority won't release ridership statistics until May, after the connector has been in operation for a full calendar month, officials said. Employees have been counting heads at times in the two new North Shore stations and Downtown's new Gateway Station.

"We've seen a lot of use of the system. It's really been well-received, both in the morning and evening rush and midday," said connector project director Keith Wargo.

The Port Authority has worked to resolve minor problems that cropped up after service began. Spokesman Jim Ritchie said the agency re-recorded audio messages that could barely be heard on station platforms when they were not cutting in and out, and it reprogrammed the system that delivers audio and electronic messages on trains that were out of sync.

The agency plans to put up additional signs that better explain where trains are headed.

"A lot of the issues are with new riders or people from out of town who aren't familiar with the system," Ritchie said, noting they might not know that Gateway Station is Downtown or that both Red and Blue Line trains go through Downtown.

He said the agency will post temporary signs where needed and permanent ones in coming months.

This follows up on the article I posted in March about the Edgewater development in Oakmont. There is an adjacent development called River's Edge (article from March, but I only found it now).

While this project is pending TIF-approval, I am very excited that this development will blend in with Edgewater and Oakmont's existing street network. While this seems obvious... it does buck the trends of 60 years of development... where cul-de-sacs ruled and developments were designed with few outlets and connections. Even today there is outcry at Summerset at Frick Park concerning connecting the neighborhood to Browns Hill Road... and the Borough of Bridgeville canceled their planned Main St. extension due to "traffic concerns" caused by a new housing development proposed in Upper St. Clair.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/vall.../s_786058.html

Quote:

River's Edge plan aims to mesh with Edgewater

By Jodi Weigand, VALLEY NEWS DISPATCH
Monday, March 12, 2012

A Seven Fields-based developer that proposed a housing complex on the remaining 28 acres of the Edgewater Steel plant site hopes to have its $8 million Tax Increment Financing request approved within the next three months.

The $85 million River's Edge at Oakmont development would include 168 homes, in a combination of single-family homes, condos and town homes as well as a private boat dock and a club house.

"I feel it certainly is the appropriate thing for the community to participate in," said Daniel Mancosh, of Brooks and Blair Homes.

If the company doesn't get the TIF, "the project doesn't go forward," he said.

A TIF offers reduced property taxes over a specified time. The money can be used for infrastructure such as roads and sewers and improvement of public areas. The TIF must be approved by Oakmont, Riverview School District and Allegheny County.

All three entities agreed last year to participate in a study to examine the proposal's feasibility. None has yet approved the request.

Although it's a separate development, the streets in River's Edge would align with those in the Edgewater at Oakmont plan.

http://riversedgeofoakmont.com/

http://riversedgeofoakmont.com/images/th_02.jpg

http://www.rdarch.com

http://www.rdarch.com/images/projects_oak_lar_1.jpg

http://www.rdarch.com/images/projects_oak_lar_11.jpg

http://www.rdarch.com/images/projects_oak_lar_12.jpg

http://www.rdarch.com/images/projects_oak_lar_13.jpg

http://www.rdarch.com/images/projects_oak_lar_14.jpg

Yeah, in that zone (meaning considering the distance from the core business districts and other regional destinations) those are very nice-looking infill plans from a density and urban planning perspective.

As I noted elsewhere, I also can't see those renderings without thinking how much value would be added if the AVR commuter service was actually launched--there should be a station right around there (the AVR runs along the eastern side of those sites, and last I knew the plan was to have an Oakmont/Verona station).

Quote:

Originally Posted by themaguffin (Post 5674478)

The "Top of the Triangle" restaurant I think was there from the building's opening (or close to it) until about 10 years ago.

Top of the Triangle closed in Sept, 2001. I worked there one summer during college break. On the 62nd floor in addition to T.O.T.T.'s main dining room and bar, there were the private dining rooms of US Steel, Rockwell Intl, The Downtown Club of Pittsburgh, and the downtown dining room of the Pittsburgh Athletic Association.

Oh, and during every weekday rush hour, the traffic guy from KDKA radio would broadcast from a desk off of the 62nd Fl elevator lobby. They actually used a telescope to spot traffic tie ups.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evergrey (Post 5675051)

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt.../s_792277.html

Okay so now the people that used to park downtown are now parking on the northside to save a few bucks. And the parking authority will find a lot more emty spaces in their downtown parking decks. And less cash because of it. I mean it's not like all those people just found new jobs downtown and are now using up parking. It's the same people that always work downtown. They just relocated their car.

New jobs may well absorb that parking capacity, although even better would be for a bunch of the surface parking in or near Downtown to be converted to higher-intensity use (which is currently the plan anyway, but a little less of it could be converted to structured parking).

I like the renderings of both the LTV site and the River's Edge development. I realize the Rivers Edge development is close to the AVR line, but it would be nice if there was some rail proposal for the Hazelwood site. I know a while back, Councilman Peduto had the idea of running a heavy rail line from Hazelwood through Oakland to Lawrenceville. Such a line would only boost value in this area as well, would it not?

Quote:

Originally Posted by daviderik (Post 5675696)

Maybe they can get rid of some of the garages downtown and replace them with high rises. :)

Viewing Page 45 of 197