PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[BrianTH]

Those agricultural changes are very interesting. They seem very reasonable and hopefully it makes it a lot easier for interested folks to get involved.

[Evergrey]

Thanks for the pics, kenyanpunk!

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by Austinlee

You're not going to convince me that Lincoln-Lemington wasn't bombed out.

Not trying to convince you, just educate you. It just seems as if you didn't see much of the neighborhood. There are certainly parts of the area that are run down... and I'm thinking you may have technically been in Homewood and thought you were in L-L? Because much of the area is far from "bombed out"... or maybe I just have a much higher tolerance for neighborhoods of a certain stripe and thus a different definition of bombed out. Because if Lincoln-Lemington is "bombed out", then much of Pittsburgh is bombed out... and I didn't realize that.

[BrianTH]

Article on the possible increase in the number of floors for the proposed Oxford tower:

http://www.post-gazette.com/business...s/201503200212

Unfortunately, the redesign was not quite what I was hoping for:

Oxford is considering increasing the number of floors in its proposed 350 Fifth Avenue skyscraper on Smithfield Street from 20 to 29 in a bid to attract an anchor tenant that would allow the company to get started on the $200 million project. Steve Guy, Oxford’s CEO, said the company was “reacting to needs” in adding more floors to the building. “We’re just trying to keep up with the people out there looking for space,” he said. . . .

The major alteration would be going from two levels of underground parking with about 100 spaces to eight levels of above-ground parking with about 400 slots. Under the plan, parking would start on the building’s third floor. The ground level would be reserved for retail and restaurants, followed by a mezzanine. Office space would sit above the parking. Oxford’s 350 Fifth redesign has the added benefit of putting all of the office floors above adjacent Warner Centre, giving tenants more commanding views of Downtown.

“It’s a design that has helped a great deal in terms of our conversations [with tenants],” Mr. Guy said. He added that Oxford decided against adding more parking underground because it is too costly. “We couldn’t go down; it was just too expensive. So we went up and it elevated the building a little bit and we ended up with a little more office space,” he said.

I'm not as adverse to above-ground parking levels in mixed-use buildings as some, but I wonder exactly how that is going to look.

Anyway, apparently nothing is happening until they get an anchor tenant (I thought the first redesign down to 20 was supposed to allow them to do it on spec, but I guess they backed off that idea).

[Evergrey]

It's going to be another The Gardens or Millcraft's Saks redevelopment...

Sadly... it seems like all we get Downtown in terms of new builds (other than PNC) is a tall parking garage topped with a small amount of condos and/or office space.

The entire Smithfield corridor is turning into a giant parking garage.

[Private Dick]

Instead, it would be really nice if Oxford just bulldozed the adjacent Warner Centre and surroundings in favor of a 400-space surface parking lot, thereby "giving tenants more commanding views of Downtown".

[BrianTH]

29 floors apparently broken down as:

1: Retail
2: Mezzanine
3-10: Parking
11-29: Office

Suppose they did (at added expense) shove the 8 floors of parking underground, reducing it to a 21-story building. Is that really preferable? I actually fully understand why tenants would prefer the office floors to be higher up, and don't most people around here want that too?

That said, I hope all these above-ground parking levels are being designed with possible future conversions in mind, because self-driving cars could ultimately drop the demand for Downtown parking way, way down.

[BrianTH]

Gaby et Jules, the French bakery in Squirrel Hill, is subleasing some space in the upcoming Market Street Grocery:

http://www.post-gazette.com/life/din...s/201503190245

It would be great if that was possible with even more local vendors, since that would give it a bit of a public market vibe (although "Market Square Market" would be a bit awkward).

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

29 floors apparently broken down as:

1: Retail
2: Mezzanine
3-10: Parking
11-29: Office

Suppose they did (at added expense) shove the 8 floors of parking underground, reducing it to a 21-story building. Is that really preferable? I actually fully understand why tenants would prefer the office floors to be higher up, and don't most people around here want that too?

That said, I hope all these above-ground parking levels are being designed with possible future conversions in mind, because self-driving cars could ultimately drop the demand for Downtown parking way, way down.

Is it preferable that Downtown increasingly caters to the automobile and parking needs? Seems to run a bit counter to yesterday's "Complete Streets" announcement. But considering PAT ridership continues to wither... parking cars in garages may increasingly be Pittsburgh's future.

[TBone7281]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

Is it preferable that Downtown increasingly caters to the automobile and parking needs? Seems to run a bit counter to yesterday's "Complete Streets" announcement. But considering PAT ridership continues to wither... parking cars in garages may increasingly be Pittsburgh's future.

I know a lot of you would much prefer parking be banished from downtown and everyone just walk/bike/T/jetpack or whatever everywhere... but the bottom line is that a lot of people that come downtown DO need to drive to get there. If there isn't anywhere to park, what do they do?

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by TBone7281

I know a lot of you would much prefer parking be banished from downtown and everyone just walk/bike/T/jetpack or whatever everywhere... but the bottom line is that a lot of people that come downtown DO need to drive to get there. If there isn't anywhere to park, what do they do?

You just answered your own question man!

[SlurmsMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

Is it preferable that Downtown increasingly caters to the automobile and parking needs? Seems to run a bit counter to yesterday's "Complete Streets" announcement. But considering PAT ridership continues to wither... parking cars in garages may increasingly be Pittsburgh's future.

I think there is still a stigma associated with transit that will be hard to overcome. I work downtown and about 50% of us peons use public transit. The rest park @ the Civic Arena lots or in the Strip. I don't know anyone at the manager level or above who ever uses public transit. So, there will always be a parking market for those willing to spend the money. And it is about to get much more expensive once the Civic Arena and Strip lots area developed.

[Private Dick]

The stigma is that... the bus sucks

[Private Dick]

Bryant St. mixed-use development in Highland Park on Wednesday.






6 townhouses with what looks to be about 4000 sq ft of ground floor retail. Bryant St. has potential, but it's a clumsy mix of structures -- many of them awful. This project will help. Strange that it hasn't been more of a solid, successful business district over the years, considering that the neighborhood has always had a solid middle to upper-middle class of residents.

[xchris125x]

Oxford may add floors to its proposed Downtown Pittsburgh tower
Hopes bigger high-rise attracts anchor tenant
March 20, 2015 12:00 AM


http://www.post-gazette.com/business..._medium=social

[Minivan Werner]

It was originally supposed to be 33 floors without parking.

I'd prefer they refurb the existing structure and build the office tower on a vacant lot or in place of a less historically significant and attractive building.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

Is it preferable that Downtown increasingly caters to the automobile and parking needs? Seems to run a bit counter to yesterday's "Complete Streets" announcement.

Complete Streets doesn't mean no provision for cars at all. It means achieving a balance which accommodates all modes.

If there is a constant percentage-share by mode (or even a shift of mode share away from cars that is sufficiently gradual), but also a growing number of employees, residents, and visitors Downtown, then Downtown is going to need more of everything--more provision for walking, biking, transit, AND cars.

Given that background, I don't have an inherent problem with Downtown developers incorporating some parking levels in significant new mixed-use projects, assuming the design (particularly street-level) is OK, and there is not much (if any) of a public subsidy involved. As previously noted, I do have a concern about self-driving cars causing a more abrupt shift in mode shares at some future point, but even then there are plenty of standalone garages that could be torn down first before you would have to start going after these parking levels incorporated into mixed-used buildings.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by SlurmsMcKenzie

I think there is still a stigma associated with transit that will be hard to overcome. I work downtown and about 50% of us peons use public transit. The rest park @ the Civic Arena lots or in the Strip. I don't know anyone at the manager level or above who ever uses public transit. So, there will always be a parking market for those willing to spend the money. And it is about to get much more expensive once the Civic Arena and Strip lots area developed.

I think it is less about stigma than about affordable options given your household income. If you can comfortably afford to live in a nice place in a nice neighborhood with an easy drive to Downtown (even in rush hour), comfortably afford a parking lease, comfortably afford a nice car, maybe comfortably afford to pay for private schools if the local schools are not so good, and so on, then driving to Downtown is a luxury you might be able to afford as subject to all those conditions, it can in fact be pretty convenient to drive.

When you don't have that kind of money, you start looking at tradeoffs. The biggest barrier to people using transit at that point is not stigma, in my view, it is the difficulty of affording a nice place in a nice neighborhoods that also has really good transit service to Downtown. This can become even more difficult when you add in the school issue--only so many places with really good transit service to Downtown also have good feeder schools.

None of this can really be solved as long as we keep underinvesting in high-quality transit service--if potential demand for such transit service is outrunning supply, the nice places in nice neighborhoods with good transit service will get bid up by those who can afford to pay more, and everyone else will be left with some difficult decisions to make.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

The stigma is that... the bus sucks

For the record, I love my bus. It picks up a half block from my house as it goes through our neighborhood, then hops on the East Busway for an express trip Downtown. It is way less expensive than paying for parking, and I can spend the ride sleeping, reading, texting, or just looking at developments in progress out the window. We've gotten to know a lot of the other regular riders, and even host parties with them.

Reliability has been the only real issue, but the new bus tracking has helped a lot with that. I could also fill the gaps more aggressively with something like Uber, but usually I don't really mind hanging out waiting for the next bus, and if I miss the last bus in the morning or evening I can always use the P1 instead (the nearest P1 station is less than a 10-min walk from our house).

But all that is possible because we can afford a place with transit service like that.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

Bryant St. mixed-use development in Highland Park on Wednesday.

Reminds me of Portland, Oregon.