Another random thought--if all this comes to fruition, the Doubletree is going to look like a major focal point of Downtown (not necessarily the most attractive possible structure to fulfill that role).

:previous: Yeah, I personally don't care for the Doubletree architecturally. To me, it seems that 6th Avenue was supposed to continue out into the Hill from Downtown. Instead, it has to veer sharply to the right and end underneath the BNY Mellon Client Services Center (which was an abomination unto urban planning and development), and have Centre Avenue extend off of it to travel up into the Hill. To me, that vicinity just looks awkward. That intersection may seem innocent from a bird's-eye view, but every time I try to navigate it I wind up almost causing multiple wrecks!

I remember when it was a Ramada, and it looked like a craphole then. There's no hope of removing that and replacing it with a re-aligned 6th/Centre Avenue and a better structure, is there?

Another view of the old Isle of Capri plan:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/attac...capri-plan.jpg

And not to burst all the excitement but in the beginning of that last Post Gazette article about the Penguins redeveloping the arena site, it specifically says: "For now it will be parking". My guess is that will probably be like that for years.....

The Penguins are subject to an agreement whereby they have to develop a certain percentage of the site each year (I think it works out to a ten year schedule). If they don't keep the schedule, they forfeit that percentage of their development rights. I believe the clock starts running sometime after the Arena is entirely gone.

Of course extensions have granted under similar deals in the past.

:previous: Didn't Continental get a similar deal, or are they going to if they haven't yet? For some reason, that whole thing comes to mind.

Also, if there is any need to completely overhaul Crosstown Blvd from Blvd of the Allies to Centre and 7th Avenues, I have a working design in mind. There probably isn't any real serious need, but you have to agree that that area sucks and needs something. For one, it's an absolute eyesore, and another, it poorly accomodates traffic. I envision the elevated steel and concrete monstrosity being replaced with a street-level actual boulevard with 2 wide lanes in each direction along with turning lanes to provide access to 5th and Forbes Avenues as well as a walking/biking trail adjacent to the vehicular lanes. It also includes construction of a green deck over the parking garage adjacent to (and underneath) 564 Forbes Avenue. I'm trying to find a way of tying this in with the Carrie Furnace trail and the potential decking between Centre and Bigelow Blvd over Crosstown Blvd. I know I'm beating this horse to death, but it's something that I strongly believe should happen...

Continental is subject to some sort of schedule and penalties, but I don't know the details.

CMU to pay $5 million for diocesan property
May 11, 2012 10:22 am
By Marylynne Pitz / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/...ty-635378/?p=1

http://c4241337.r37.cf2.rackcdn.com/...r_original.jpg
The Cardinal Dearden Center, left, is on Fifth Avenue in Oakland.


Carnegie Mellon University plans to pay the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh more than $5 million for a three-story building on a half-acre on Fifth Avenue. The Cardinal Dearden Center is one of five parcels totaling nearly 1 1/2 acres at the site that the diocese hopes to sell to CMU, substantially expanding the university's holdings in the heart of Oakland.

Sale of the Dearden Center, now home to six retired priests, marks another step in Bishop David Zubik's plan to centralize diocesan operations at St. Paul Seminary in Crafton. The Rev. Ron Lengwin, diocese spokesman, said the diocese hopes to complete the transaction by the end of June. CMU officials declined to discuss the purchase or what they planned to do with the land.

"We defer any comment to the diocese until an agreement is finalized," said Teresa Thomas, a CMU spokeswoman.

The Dearden Center property includes a carriage house and a large two-story structure that are used to store archives and surplus religious articles, such as statues and crucifixes from closed parishes. Three of the other four diocesan-owned parcels are next to the Dearden Center at Clyde Street and Fifth. The largest, at 4723 Fifth Ave., is a garden that faces Fifth and another is a surface parking lot.

http://c4241337.r37.cf2.rackcdn.com/...center_420.jpg
The diocese also hopes to sell the Roselia Center, a three-story building at 624 Clyde St. owned by Catholic Charities. The Roselia Center, which contains administrative offices, is contiguous to and behind the Dearden Center. Separating it from the other three diocesan properties is a one-third acre parcel occupied by a four-story apartment building at 630 Clyde St.

Residential zoning for the Dearden Center parcels would allow CMU to build a structure that is nine stories high.

5/10/12

Lot 24
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7219/7...659ac98c_b.jpg


Demo for PNC Tower
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8150/7...226259cd_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7241/7...72cc297c_b.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5338/7...30962370_b.jpg

Nice shots Tbone. How is Otto Milk looking? Is it nearing completion yet?

Their website said people started moving in Q1 of 2011, though work continued through that summer. I haven't see anyone working on it this year, and there are some lights on in some of the units when I come in at 6 so I assume it's done. :cheers:

I am actually curious now. with some recent discussion about the proposed High Point Park and after someone suggested adding more floors on top of One World Trade in another thread, is it possible to add more floors on top of the US Steel Building? It seems that in some of those renderings it does look like they want to add at least a couple of observation levels/park space...

Also, nice to see Lot 24 moving right along.

Question
 

I need help, I remember in the first development threat there were scrapped plans of skyscrapers in Southside called Garden City or something like that? I thought it was really neat but can't find it anywhere!!

By the way, the new multi-unit going up in Squirrel Hill along Forbes just west of Murray looks a lot like a baby version of Lot 24.

Generally, there seem to be many projects like this in Pittsburgh these days--they may not be highrises, but you can get to some pretty high residential densities this way.

For sure. With the addition of Lot 24, there will be 450 housing units within 2 blocks of each other right around my office in the Strip. I would imagine there will be some additional growth in the neighborhood to support the influx of residents, assuming they show up. :)

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7223/7...89e53569_b.jpg

Red = Lofts (Cork Factory): 297 units
Green = Lot 24: 96 units
Blue = Otto Milk Condos: 58 units

Slowly but surely, new residents seem to be coming back to Pittsburgh itself rather than to the suburbs. Always a plus, no doubt about it. Nice to see the continuing development/redevelopment of under-utilized surface lots and formerly-decrepit structures!

Aaron (Glowrock)

How many units are there in the Cork Factory?

:tup:

If my calculations are correct, Lot 24 is going to have a population density higher than Manhattan.

Now of course that is kind of a silly comparison, and you probably won't get to Manhattanesque densities overall if you are mixing things like Lot 24 in with non-residential usages of land. My point, though, is that converting surface lots (or, in the case of the Squirrel Hill project, lots containing a few SFH) into multi-units like this will at least be pushing the relevant neighborhoods in that direction.

My apartment also has a population density higher than Manhattan. :)

I know what you are saying, though I have an issue with the Squirrel Hill project on Forbes. It doesn't really increase the density of the neighborhood in such a manner to be viewed as a positive development in my eyes. They took out five tightly-packed together 1920s brick and stone quality homes for this "sustainable, green" condo development.

I find it counterproductive to sustainability and increasing density in Squirrel Hill in two main ways: first, there is nothing sustainable about removal of what is already there (especially when the homes were of high-quality construction, historically representative of the era, and appropriate for the scale of the immediate surroundings)... regardless of whether the homes were deconstructed and some of their materials reused... in favor of a new condo development; second, there exist plenty of empty lots and crumbling buildings in close proximity in Squirrel Hill which would have been far more appropriate for this type of development -- where this type of development would benefit the neighborhood revitalization overall much more, by encouraging rehab of surrounding structures, stimulating economic activity, and significantly increasing density.