HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1521  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2018, 5:27 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,210
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1522  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2018, 6:20 PM
Urbanthusiat's Avatar
Urbanthusiat Urbanthusiat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: South Philly
Posts: 1,680
^^Awesome, Pittsburgh is so lucky to have CMU leading the tech revolution here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1523  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2018, 7:24 PM
DKNewYork DKNewYork is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 494
Pitt's New Master Plan

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1524  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2018, 1:25 PM
bossride bossride is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 30
Quote:
New business:

2. An attempt to convert a legal seven unit in Allegheny West into an eight unit (with no offstreet parking). The building now is ugly as sin - one of the worst remuddles in Allegheny West - so I hope it goes to the HRC for some restoration as well.
The building shown in the Google picture is not 841, it's 833-835. 833-835, definitely previously remuddled, has been undergoing some changes. The window arches have been rebuilt, new window hoods have been installed, and, slowly, new windows are going in.

833-835 N Lincoln

This is 841:

http://www2.county.allegheny.pa.us/r...08A00125000000

Last edited by bossride; Sep 30, 2018 at 1:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1525  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2018, 4:52 AM
Wave Wave is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKNewYork View Post
Even if only half of this comes to fruition, Oakland is clearly poised for an even more dramatic increase in density over the next 10 years than it has experienced in the past 10 years or more.

And with office space at near 100% occupancy, with high very high demand, a serious shortage of biotech lab space, and the trend of businesses choosing urban over suburban space, the BRT in the works etc., the additional "innovation zone" projects are not only a good bet, many are already in the works.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1526  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2018, 1:32 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossride View Post
The building shown in the Google picture is not 841, it's 833-835. 833-835, definitely previously remuddled, has been undergoing some changes. The window arches have been rebuilt, new window hoods have been installed, and, slowly, new windows are going in.

833-835 N Lincoln

This is 841:

http://www2.county.allegheny.pa.us/r...08A00125000000
I can't believe I made that mistake, but I'm glad you posted pictures of the building I mentioned and the ongoing restoration. I'm shocked it wasn't covered in the Historic Review Commission in the past.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1527  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2018, 1:45 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,210
Regarding Pitt's master plan, the biggest surprise to me at first glance was all the new housing south of the campus. Including some housing replacing these dorms, which are about a decade old. I'm glad they're going higher density, and the replacement is listed as a medium-term project, but the lifespan of a modern dorm should be greater than 20 years. Basically they're admitting they goofed and built them at too small a scale.

It's interesting to see their plans for One Bigelow as well, since that's going to be a project relatively soon. I can understand the thinking behind the quad, but it does seem a little odd how close the PAA, the new hotel, and their taller structure will be crammed together in order to make room for said quad.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1528  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2018, 2:05 PM
Steel City Scotty's Avatar
Steel City Scotty Steel City Scotty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 301
Doesn't look like PITT has any plans to bring a football stadium back to campus.

I realize the chances of that are slim, and I haven't lived in the city long enough to remember the old stadium that was up where the Petersen Events Center is now, but it seems like that would be more convenient for students, and the Panthers always seem like a second-tier tenant when playing their games in Heinz Field in front of rather small crowds.
__________________
"I didn't speak English until I came to Pittsburgh" - Mario Lemieux
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1529  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2018, 3:32 PM
DKNewYork DKNewYork is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Regarding Pitt's master plan, the biggest surprise to me at first glance was all the new housing south of the campus. Including some housing replacing these dorms, which are about a decade old. I'm glad they're going higher density, and the replacement is listed as a medium-term project, but the lifespan of a modern dorm should be greater than 20 years. Basically they're admitting they goofed and built them at too small a scale.

It's interesting to see their plans for One Bigelow as well, since that's going to be a project relatively soon. I can understand the thinking behind the quad, but it does seem a little odd how close the PAA, the new hotel, and their taller structure will be crammed together in order to make room for said quad.
The South Bouquet student housing has always seemed clumsy and out of place so I was thrilled to see the plan to replace it, even though it is relatively new. And while the renderings of the replacement buildings are taller (and I realize that master plan renderings are just that), I would have hoped that Pitt would plan to build even taller. Nordenberg and Panther Halls are both more than ten stories. Perhaps the zoning laws don't allow taller on South Bouquet---if so, the university should appeal. The plan points out repeatedly that the school is limiting itself to property that it already owns. That seems a huge goodwill gesture to the Oakland community so Pitt's neighbors should return the favor.

Re One Bigelow: I kinda liked the mid block open space...until I saw how close the taller building will be to the new hotel. Maybe there will be a suitable distance between the two buildings but the rendering made it look otherwise.

Welcome news that Crabtree Hall and the Forbes Avenue CVS will both be replaced by much taller buildings.

The mystery to me is the sizeable addition to the Frick Fine Arts Building, depicted on the maps but not mentioned in any of the detail. I believe that the Frick Building is actually in Schenley Park so I wonder if this would pose additional hurdles to this particular project. It looks like it would largely unseen; I think it will go on the site of the current baseball field.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1530  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2018, 3:56 PM
DKNewYork DKNewYork is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Regarding Pitt's master plan, the biggest surprise to me at first glance was all the new housing south of the campus. Including some housing replacing these dorms, which are about a decade old. I'm glad they're going higher density, and the replacement is listed as a medium-term project, but the lifespan of a modern dorm should be greater than 20 years. Basically they're admitting they goofed and built them at too small a scale.

It's interesting to see their plans for One Bigelow as well, since that's going to be a project relatively soon. I can understand the thinking behind the quad, but it does seem a little odd how close the PAA, the new hotel, and their taller structure will be crammed together in order to make room for said quad.
One more observation: It's great that the vacant space surrounding Hillman Library and Lawrence and Posvar Halls will be utilized. The good-sized triangular green space on South Bouquet will be fully filled-in with construction. And Posvar Hall's facades on both Bouquet and Clemente will be "veneered" with space---hopefully with some street retail---to better adhere to the street wall as well as soften the concrete expanse of Posvar. Assuming that this construction has ample glass and minimal concrete, it should help considerably.

Similarly, the proposed Academic Success Center will replace that desolate driveway/dumpster parking lot between Hillman and Lawrence Halls.

The construction that replaced Forbes Field will never be inviting but these changes will be for the better. When in Oakland a couple weeks ago, I saw the new---well, new to me---landscaping between Hillman and Posvar. Much prettier than it had been and crowded with students.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1531  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2018, 3:58 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKNewYork View Post
The South Bouquet student housing has always seemed clumsy and out of place so I was thrilled to see the plan to replace it, even though it is relatively new. And while the renderings of the replacement buildings are taller (and I realize that master plan renderings are just that), I would have hoped that Pitt would plan to build even taller. Nordenberg and Panther Halls are both more than ten stories. Perhaps the zoning laws don't allow taller on South Bouquet---if so, the university should appeal. The plan points out repeatedly that the school is limiting itself to property that it already owns. That seems a huge goodwill gesture to the Oakland community so Pitt's neighbors should return the favor.
I'm guessing part of the reason why Boquet Gardens was built at low density was that Pitt was unable to get full site control, at the time. They have since bought these two houses. They still don't own these two further down the block. I had no idea they had bought out the area across the street - looks like some of the transactions only cleared within the last few months.

The way that EMI zoning works is that the master plan effectively is the zoning document. Hence Pitt will set whatever height limits they want as part of this. They have yet to ask for their new acquisitions on the west side of Oakland Avenue to be added to EMI, but I'm sure that's coming, because in most cases the city seems to accept EMI expansion no questions asked. There are exceptions though. The bits which are zoned OPR (Oakland Public Realm) probably will not be swallowed into the EMI zone, because Pitt already owns property here which has kept that designation. Ditto the changes to the Frick Fine Arts building, as it's in an area technically zoned parkland. But in general, their new masterplan is the governing document.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DKNewYork View Post
One more observation: It's great that the vacant space surrounding Hillman Library and Lawrence and Posvar Halls will be utilized. The good-sized triangular green space on South Bouquet will be fully filled-in with construction. And Posvar Hall's facades on both Bouquet and Clemente will be "veneered" with space---hopefully with some street retail---to better adhere to the street wall as well as soften the concrete expanse of Posvar. Assuming that this construction has ample glass and minimal concrete, it should help considerably.
It's a bit surprising they're not talking about replacing the Katz building as well. It's a dated and sits very akwardly on its parcel for an urban campus. The front entrance being on Roberto Clemente Drive never made any sense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1532  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2018, 5:04 PM
DKNewYork DKNewYork is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
I'm guessing part of the reason why Boquet Gardens was built at low density was that Pitt was unable to get full site control, at the time. They have since bought these two houses. They still don't own these two further down the block. I had no idea they had bought out the area across the street - looks like some of the transactions only cleared within the last few months.

The way that EMI zoning works is that the master plan effectively is the zoning document. Hence Pitt will set whatever height limits they want as part of this. They have yet to ask for their new acquisitions on the west side of Oakland Avenue to be added to EMI, but I'm sure that's coming, because in most cases the city seems to accept EMI expansion no questions asked. There are exceptions though. The bits which are zoned OPR (Oakland Public Realm) probably will not be swallowed into the EMI zone, because Pitt already owns property here which has kept that designation. Ditto the changes to the Frick Fine Arts building, as it's in an area technically zoned parkland. But in general, their new masterplan is the governing document.



It's a bit surprising they're not talking about replacing the Katz building as well. It's a dated and sits very akwardly on its parcel for an urban campus. The front entrance being on Roberto Clemente Drive never made any sense.
Thanks for the explanation. I had always assumed that the South Bouquet housing we have was the cheapest and quickest construction that could be completed and that Pitt needed the rooms ASAP.

I am fully onboard with replacing the Katz building. It is inoffensive enough but the siting, as you point out, is so awkward---angled badly in relation to both streets and set too far back. Maybe in the next master plan...

Is the Katz building also in Schenley Park?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1533  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2018, 5:15 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKNewYork View Post
I am fully onboard with replacing the Katz building. It is inoffensive enough but the siting, as you point out, is so awkward---angled badly in relation to both streets and set too far back. Maybe in the next master plan...
Technically I think these master plans are supposed to show projects up to 25 years in the future. Of course Pitt will have another master plan sooner than that, but it shows they don't even have long-term plans to fix that dated building right now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DKNewYork View Post
Is the Katz building also in Schenley Park?
Nope. The dividing line is just behind the building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1534  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2018, 7:11 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,210
Pittsburgh Business Times is reporting that JMC (which also owns the Pennsylvanian) is on the cusp of closing on the Federal Cold Storage (Wholey) building in the Strip District. Their plans apparently include the option of demolishing the existing structure and building a 17-story office tower. It's feasible in that location because that section of the Strip is zoned GT-B - one of the downtown zones which extends down Grant Street, and thus doesn't have to deal with any of the height limits imposed in the Strip.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1535  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2018, 7:55 PM
BrianTH BrianTH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,071
I liked the idea of reusing the cold storage building, but a 17-story office tower would be a more than satisfactory alternative (and hopefully Buncher would get the message).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1536  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2018, 12:58 PM
BobLoblaw BobLoblaw is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Their plans apparently include the option of demolishing the existing structure and building a 17-story office tower.
The article says, "Sources indicate JMC has been considering a mix of different approaches for an office redevelopment, including the possibility of tearing the building down and replacing it at great expense, a prospect the company has now shelved for a plan to build onto the established concrete structure."

So, while demolishing and building new is/was an option, it sounds like they would instead look to build on top of it.

I liked the look of the apartments that were proposed a few years back, but after another five years of sitting vacant it would be good to see some activity in whatever form the market/financeability dictates.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1537  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2018, 4:08 PM
photoLith's Avatar
photoLith photoLith is offline
Ex Houstonian
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pittsburgh n’ at
Posts: 15,495
I hope they open up that building and put windows on it or something, as of right now its a horribly depressing ugly looking building. Are there any historic photos of what it looked like before, like did it ever have windows or a brick facade?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1538  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2018, 4:14 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoLith View Post
I hope they open up that building and put windows on it or something, as of right now its a horribly depressing ugly looking building. Are there any historic photos of what it looked like before, like did it ever have windows or a brick facade?
It's only from 1962, and was constructed to be a cold storage warehouse. It's meant to look like that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1539  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2018, 5:34 PM
Minivan Werner Minivan Werner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 497
That thing's gotta go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1540  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2018, 7:11 PM
BrianTH BrianTH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,071
Wasn't there a plan at one point to turn it into a parking structure and build on top of it?

Not necessarily my favorite idea, but I wonder if that is what the article is referencing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:31 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.