PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown III

[BenM]

Originally Posted by eschaton

A couple of smaller notes on things.

1. It seems the Albright Methodist Church was not actually protected from demolition back in 2016. A court ruled that even though the HRC and the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council grant historic status to the 112-year old church, because the City Council never took formal action, the structure is not protected. It seems clear the United Methodist Church now plans to demolish the Church, and Peduto has no plans to challenge the ruling. It's unclear if the result will be a drive-through Starbucks as was originally desired.

This is a shame.

Is the value of the land with prospects for development into mid sized food/retail that much greater than that of renovation of a unique architectural building?

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by DKNewYork

Misleading and inaccurate. ANSYS Hall has been under construction for months so why announce it now? I guess that BCJ wanted bragging rights to two ongoing CMU projects. The article also states that ANSYS Hall will be completed in summer of 2020 while TCS Hall, which is three times larger and not yet under-construction, is set to be completed in the spring of 2020. Is that possible?

I knew the permitting had gone out, but I don't really venture on CMU's campus often (last time was for a concert like eight years ago), so I had no idea construction was underway.

Originally Posted by BenM

This is a shame.

Is the value of the land with prospects for development into mid sized food/retail that much greater than that of renovation of a unique architectural building?

In this particular case it must be. Churches are hard to retrofit into other uses in general, and given in this particular case it's just behind a much larger Methodist church, there's no particular reason for the owners to keep it operational.

Also, due to being boxed in by the (unfortunately) newly-constructed Wendy's drive through and Levin Mattress, there really isn't enough land here for one of those new 100+ unit apartment buildings. The plot's significantly smaller than even Doughboy Square Apartments, which was only a 45-unit building. Basically UNC's parking requirements likely screw denser development for now, as structured parking would be required for almost anything greater than a one-story retail building, which would cause costs to rise through the roof.

I really don't know if the Starbucks is still a go, but if the original developer (Ross Development Company) is still involved, they are almost certainly not well capitalized enough to do anything interesting.

[eschaton]

Planning Commission presentation for next week has landed. Four items (actually three), one of big importance:

1. Signage for 225 North Shore Drive. The building will now have a Seubert logo instead of Peoples.

2. Transfer of development rights for 316 Fourth Avenue (Commonwealth Building). The 21-story building has been vacant for two decades. The planned remodel will convert it from its notional current use (office space) into a 150-unit apartment building. Zoning actually limits the number of units to 75, so they need a special deal with the Parking Authority to double the unit count. Looks like some ground-floor retail is planned for the structure as well.

3/4. The big big news - the long-rumored comprehensive rezoning of Hazelwood Green (formerly ALMONO) by Perkins + Will has arrived. There's a ton to absorb here, and I don't have the old Rothschild Doyno master plan in front of me to compare. Eyeballing it it looks like they're moving towards a much more mixed-use and residential-heavy model of Hazelwood Green, where residential uses would be allowed almost everywhere aside from the core around Mill 19. There's much more public open space, and the developable blocks seem to be smaller and more analogous to the existing block pattern. Allowable building heights have been upped as well - at least 150 feet everywhere but two blocks close to the existing "Scotch Bottom" neighborhood, and up to 240 feet closer to PTC. There are significant restrictions on surface parking outside of the industrial zone which should result in an urban street feel. There also seem to be some tentative plans for a quasi-business district along Lytle Street. On the whole, it's great. Now let's see some real all-new construction projects here please!

[guyFROMtheBURGH]

Kennywood just announced that they are adding a new section to the park called 'Steelers Country' with a new roller coaster named 'Steel Curtain'.

https://www.kennywood.com/steelerscountry

It's a yinsplosion...



https://youtu.be/z5egpMVrUOo

[BenM]

Originally Posted by guyFROMtheBURGH

Kennywood just announced that they are adding a new section to the park called 'Steelers Country' with a new roller coaster named 'Steel Curtain'.

https://www.kennywood.com/steelerscountry

It's a yinsplosion...



https://youtu.be/z5egpMVrUOo

That's one of the best renderings ever.

[pj3000]

^ This kind of stuff gets a significant portion of the population excited... so yeah, Kennywood's gonna make $$$$$$$$ on this.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by eschaton

and up to 240 feet closer to PTC.

Amazon effect?

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Amazon effect?

I just checked, and the area of the PTC closest to the Hot Metal Bridge has height limits of 145, so it's nowhere near as tall. Hell, this is taller than the 150 height limits that the city is planning to put in some riverfront areas like Chateau. Thus it will allow for the tallest buildings without a variance of anywhere outside of Downtown and a tiny bit of North Oakland (where maximum units per square foot put effective height limits in anyway). The graphic on Page 31 seems to show that a 240-foot building would not be visible from the core of Oakland (presuming no buildings were in the way). But it would be tall enough to block views from residential portions of South Oakland.

As has long been the case, my biggest fear with Hazelwood Green is that it will become a convenient dumping ground for lower-income people gentrified out of the East End. I mean, I sincerely hope that some level of mixed-income housing is put into the area, but it won't reach its full potential if that's all it is. And if commercial and industrial development proceeds at a slow pace, there will be strong temptation to start placing some HUD-assisted projects there to begin filling the community out more.

Edit: Found a more in-depth version of the new master plan on the Hazelwood Green website:

[BrianTH]

My guess is a lot will depend on transportation connections. The plan calls for some sort of light rail or BRT lane along Second Avenue. There are other possible ideas for connecting the area up to Oakland. If all that happens I think there is a good chance it will become a desirable area to live and locate offices and such.

[Captain Crash]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

My guess is a lot will depend on transportation connections. The plan calls for some sort of light rail or BRT lane along Second Avenue. There are other possible ideas for connecting the area up to Oakland. If all that happens I think there is a good chance it will become a desirable area to live and locate offices and such.

The plan also suggests an aerial gondola route from Oakland down to Hazelwood, across to the Southside, then up to Hays Woods.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Captain Crash

The plan also suggests an aerial gondola route from Oakland down to Hazelwood, across to the Southside, then up to Hays Woods.

Holy moly, I didn't see that.

That would be cool.

[Wally G]

Originally Posted by BenM

That's one of the best renderings ever.

This is a great idea and the rendering is great.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

My guess is a lot will depend on transportation connections. The plan calls for some sort of light rail or BRT lane along Second Avenue. There are other possible ideas for connecting the area up to Oakland. If all that happens I think there is a good chance it will become a desirable area to live and locate offices and such.

It looks like the plan now is to develop Hazelwood Green in a phased method. First they plan to build out the "Mill District" around Mill 19, primarily with light industrial and commercial uses. Once there are substantial numbers of jobs located there, they will begin pushing for more local residential options - first in the "Flats District" (which is still mostly under lease as a test facility for Uber's self-driving cars) and then later still in the "River District." The idea seems to be to save the area which has the highest possible density for last, because you'd need higher land values and demand before high-rises in that area would be warranted.

I have to say though that it seems like the "residential density" and "job density" calculations is totally spitballing it here. They have no idea if each of the parcels will be built out in maximum density. And the majority of the site basically allows for any use (medium/high density residential, office, hotel, light industrial, R&D, commercial, structured parking, community, etc). Given this is the case, I don't understand how they can make a claim on how many jobs/residents each sub-zone will have.

[DKNewYork]

The link below is to an American Theatre article with the first photo I've seen of the nearly-complete interior of the largest theatre at the new Playhouse.

https://www.americantheatre.org/2018...-in-fall-2018/

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I have to say though that it seems like the "residential density" and "job density" calculations is totally spitballing it here. They have no idea if each of the parcels will be built out in maximum density. And the majority of the site basically allows for any use (medium/high density residential, office, hotel, light industrial, R&D, commercial, structured parking, community, etc). Given this is the case, I don't understand how they can make a claim on how many jobs/residents each sub-zone will have.

Isn't that inevitable for something like this? You develop some sort of planning model but it is necessarily based on demand predictions which may or may not prove accurate (if it was easy to make accurate demand predictions, much of business and economics would be a LOT easier).

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by DKNewYork

The link below is to an American Theatre article with the first photo I've seen of the nearly-complete interior of the largest theatre at the new Playhouse.

https://www.americantheatre.org/2018...-in-fall-2018/

Yep, that is definitely a student theater, not a major new venue as they wanted people to think.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Isn't that inevitable for something like this? You develop some sort of planning model but it is necessarily based on demand predictions which may or may not prove accurate (if it was easy to make accurate demand predictions, much of business and economics would be a LOT easier).

Of course. I'd just rather they not make predictions at all.

One thing I love about the new plan however is the almost total flexibility that developers will have to accommodate virtually any use. This means Almono won't end up in a situation like say South Side Works or PTC were in, where the office market softened a bit and it was difficult to pivot the site quickly to residential. Thus rather than trying to come up with a master plan based upon the demand today which will still be operable 20 years out, the development can and will shift gears based upon what there's local demand for.

On the other hand, I'm a bit miffed about the relatively high parking requirements. 0.85 spaces per residential unit is less than under Pittsburgh's standard zoning, but it's way higher than the 0.5 spaces per unit in the new riverfront zoning requirements.

[AaronPGH]

Looks like Luis Vidal is going to be the lead architect for PIT's new terminal, which is badass. He's responsible for Heathrow's T2, and the stunning Madrid airport:

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by AaronPGH

Looks like Luis Vidal is going to be the lead architect for PIT's new terminal, which is badass. He's responsible for Heathrow's T2, and the stunning Madrid airport:

That's a bit too open and airy for me. I need low ceilings... and an environment that makes me feel like I'm still in the plane.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by pj3000

That's a bit too open and airy for me. I need low ceilings... and an environment that makes me feel like I'm still in the plane.

I know you're being sarcastic and all, but I am really not a fan of false comparisons. The PIT photo is obviously of one of the concourses (doesn't matter since they're all essentially identical), while the Madrid one is of what appears to be the main terminal.

Not attacking you, BTW. Would just like to see apples vs. apples comparisons, that's all. Terminal to terminal, concourse to concourse. For the record, I think the Madrid Airport terminal looks AMAZING!

Aaron (Glowrock)