HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2017, 3:16 PM
photoLith's Avatar
photoLith photoLith is offline
Ex Houstonian
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pittsburgh and Wellsburg, WV
Posts: 11,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
Eyeball report: looks like the Larimer development phase across from the Target is moving along well--there are cranes and structures going up. That is really going to transform that stretch of Broad and further expand the "East Liberty" footprint.
Is all that new development around the abandoned St Peter and Paul Church and across from the Target just public housing? If so, that won't really help with any revitalization efforts.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2017, 3:21 PM
pj3000 pj3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
That's actually a three-unit, according to the assessor's site. It's owned by the Highland Park Community Development Corporation, so my guess is it's vacant. It was built some time between 1900 and 1910 judging by the historic maps, so it must have just been horrendously remuddled at some point, not intended to be brutalist.
Right, it's definitely an old building that was bizarrely transformed in the drug-induced 60s or 70s. Here's a shot of the monstrosity and the lot to the left where the townhomes are to be built.



I lived on Mellon years ago, and that building always stood out as a "wtf were they thinking with that?" whenever I passed by.

It's almost as if the new townhomes are attempting to incorporate the "architectural style" of it into their design...


Anyway, it's good to see Highland Park really coming back. It's probably my favorite neighborhood overall in Pittsburgh. When I lived there, it was rough if you were a block or so west of Highland. Now, the prices I see there are astounding (even for houses that require significant structural renovations). Based on the Subaru and BMW in the above rendering, it looks like the developers are trying to attract a different demographic than who lives there now...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2017, 3:51 PM
BrianTH BrianTH is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,109
Our public authorities have completed their new sweetheart deal for the Penguins, thereby officially taking ownership of this debacle:

http://www.post-gazette.com/business...s/201712060074

Meanwhile:

Quote:
Mr. Williams said the Penguins are ready to roll. “We are turning the page and are ready to move forward on the next stage of development,” he said. That will start Wednesday evening when the team and St. Louis-based developer McCormack Baron Salazar host a design workshop and charrette involving the first 250 of the 1,000 residential units to be built at the site near Crawford Square. . . .

The current plan calls for McCormack Baron to build the first 250 apartments units in a four- to five-story building. The KBK team will follow with another 250 units in a similarly sized building on an adjacent parcel in the second phase. Another 500 units will be developed by McCormack Baron on the upper part of the site abutting Crawford Street and Bedford Avenue in the third phase.
Raise your hand if you think this will end up looking anything like the cool, innovative BIG plan, versus the generic developments on the same scale we have seen lately across the City.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2017, 4:01 PM
BrianTH BrianTH is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoLith View Post
Is all that new development around the abandoned St Peter and Paul Church and across from the Target just public housing? If so, that won't really help with any revitalization efforts.
This is Phase III of the Choice Neighborhoods plan. It is a mix of affordable and market-rate housing, which has been working out great so far in that area. Of course the usual suspects will assert with great confidence that no one with a decent income would ever choose to live in mixed-income developments. And then all the market-rate units quickly lease out.

Edit: Oh, and it may contain some ground-floor retail. At least that was the original plan. Also, I should note "affordable" includes both actual HUD-assisted units and "workforce" units, with the latter units having higher qualifying income limits.

Last edited by BrianTH; Dec 6, 2017 at 4:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2017, 4:11 PM
pj3000 pj3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoLith View Post
Is all that new development around the abandoned St Peter and Paul Church and across from the Target just public housing? If so, that won't really help with any revitalization efforts.
I think that's all part of the Larimer/East Liberty Gardens plan. Comprehensive with housing, parks, sports facilities, etc.

I think it will drastically revitalize an area that was nothing but poorly-constructed 1970s low-income apartments.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2017, 4:17 PM
photoLith's Avatar
photoLith photoLith is offline
Ex Houstonian
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pittsburgh and Wellsburg, WV
Posts: 11,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by pj3000 View Post
Right, it's definitely an old building that was bizarrely transformed in the drug-induced 60s or 70s. Here's a shot of the monstrosity and the lot to the left where the townhomes are to be built.



I lived on Mellon years ago, and that building always stood out as a "wtf were they thinking with that?" whenever I passed by.

It's almost as if the new townhomes are attempting to incorporate the "architectural style" of it into their design...
.
That horribly remudled building looks like it was originally constructed in the late 1910s or so. If it were ever restored it would look great and I'm sure was originally cladded in brick ornementation.

And so now that the city owns the former Penguins land does this mean that development will start hopefully next year?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2017, 4:35 PM
pj3000 pj3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,046
^ There is no possibility of restoring that building. It could certainly be improved, but it is structurally altered to an extent that it could not be restored to its original appearance without basically demoing it and rebuilding it. Probably 80% of it is not original anyway. It's a lost cause and would be best leveled.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2017, 4:38 PM
BrianTH BrianTH is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoLith View Post
And so now that the city owns the former Penguins land does this mean that development will start hopefully next year?
That's not the deal. The deal is the Penguins no longer have to forfeit land they don't develop until 2028. Moreover, they no longer have to buy the land they develop as they develop it. The public also has to build them a very expensive, 1000-car garage.

In return, we no longer have to give them $14 million in tax credits, which they could use to buy the land. In other words, they basically just bought the land for the future value of $14 million, which is less in present value. Also, if they don't meet certain intermediary benchmarks, they will have to give up a minority of their parking revenue.

Overall, this is a bad deal for the public, because we very likely could have gotten more money for the land and gotten better projects by taking the land back and bidding it off, rather than selling it to the Penguins on a no-bid basis. That garage is also bound to be a money-loser so that is another huge giveaway to the Penguins.

Still, everyone involved in the deal is swearing this means development will start now and move along faster, despite the fact they just waived the original deadlines and associated penalties. We'll see, but the local history of these deals is when the sports team/developer doesn't meet its benchmarks/targets, the enforcement of the old deal is waived and it gets a new deal instead . . . which is exactly what just happened.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2017, 7:28 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by pj3000 View Post
I think that's all part of the Larimer/East Liberty Gardens plan. Comprehensive with housing, parks, sports facilities, etc.
To be fair, I do think there is a planned, small "Phase IV" which will be developed on the semi-abandoned ballfield if additional funds are ever found.

It may be a long time coming, however. Both the House and Senate tax bills reduce the number of affordable units developed through Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Thus we're quite likely to see a rollback in privately-funded mixed-income housing in the next few years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pj3000 View Post
^ There is no possibility of restoring that building. It could certainly be improved, but it is structurally altered to an extent that it could not be restored to its original appearance without basically demoing it and rebuilding it. Probably 80% of it is not original anyway. It's a lost cause and would be best leveled.
It's mildly surprising that demolition of the building isn't part of the infill project. The Highland Park Community Development Corp owns the now vacant lots, not only that godawful building. While the cost to the developer to demo it would raise the project cost a bit, considering they are selling the homes at $650,000 each I would think they could make a fourth larger and fancier unit. Or hell, if they were okay with 20 foot property widths, they could have fit five homes there instead of four.

On the flip side, I would guess the unit right next to the decaying husk will be rather hard to sell.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2017, 4:55 AM
AaronPGH's Avatar
AaronPGH AaronPGH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,607
I actually kinda like that remuddled building. With some love, it could give me Mexico City vibes. lol
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2017, 5:31 AM
pj3000 pj3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronPGH View Post
I actually kinda like that remuddled building. With some love, it could give me Mexico City vibes. lol
Aside from the fact that those balconies are most likely total death traps, there's nothing that a new coat of paint can't fix.

It could be a tremendous party pad.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2017, 12:31 PM
Wally G's Avatar
Wally G Wally G is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoLith View Post
Is all that new development around the abandoned St Peter and Paul Church and across from the Target just public housing? If so, that won't really help with any revitalization efforts.
Anything is a huge step up from what was already there and will be a better fit for that area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2017, 2:11 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,666
The Penguins have decided on the minority-owned developer which is going to be building part of of the Lower Hill project. Most salient quote...

Quote:
The first phase of residential construction in the Lower Hill will include 54 “affordable” units at the corner of Crawford Street and Wylie Avenue.

They will be adjacent to 201 market-rate units in a rectangular block along Crawford stretching to Centre Avenue, design renderings presented Wednesday show.

The second phase — to be developed by Intergen — includes 250 mixed-income residential units and community open space.

Another 450 units will follow in the third through fifth phases.

Prospective tenants can choose from one-bedroom units at 612 square feet, two-bedroom units at 928 square feet and three-bedroom units at 1,164 square feet, each with its own washer and dryer.
Latest "master plan"



I'm not sure I like that the first phase is segregating the affordable and market-rate units - it defeats the whole purpose of mixed-income housing (which is to stabilize the development by avoiding concentrated poverty). It does look like the density in 1A is higher than they originally called for (I believe this was originally a townhouse area) I also like that they are (theoretically) building out the Centre Avenue side of the development first, because it will probably help move along new development in Uptown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2017, 2:14 PM
photoLith's Avatar
photoLith photoLith is offline
Ex Houstonian
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pittsburgh and Wellsburg, WV
Posts: 11,371
^
So it's just going to be another generic development with more than likely crap cheap architecture.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2017, 3:03 PM
AaronPGH's Avatar
AaronPGH AaronPGH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,607
What was the point of all of these designs by BIG and AE7 if they were just going to get tossed into the trash? Who was even behind getting those put together?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2017, 3:08 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronPGH View Post
What was the point of all of these designs by BIG and AE7 if they were just going to get tossed into the trash? Who was even behind getting those put together?
It looks like McCormack Baron Salazar hired BIG at least directly, so it's not like the City or URA paid for those master plans to go forward.

My guess is it was all conceptual fluff to make people go "Ooh! Ahh!" and let the Penguins do whatever they wanted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2017, 3:22 PM
bmust71 bmust71 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 120
Civic Arena site is going to look horrible... are those surface lots in the master plan?? Shame. Bet there won't be one building on that site > 8 stories
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2017, 3:28 PM
eschaton eschaton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmust71 View Post
Civic Arena site is going to look horrible... are those surface lots in the master plan?? Shame. Bet there won't be one building on that site > 8 stories
The original master plan (which they are cribbing off of it seems, throwing out the BIG and AE7 plans entirely) had no surface lots. What you see are two parking garages.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2017, 5:03 PM
pj3000 pj3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,046
Seems that there are too many inhibiting forces (the Penguins, Hill District community groups, a city administration that's way too close to both of them, and the simple lack of high demand for large-scale market rate/luxury residential and commercial space in Pittsburgh) at play at the Civic Arena site for it to be developed in a high-quality, top-tier manner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2017, 5:29 PM
Minivan Werner Minivan Werner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronPGH View Post
What was the point of all of these designs by BIG and AE7 if they were just going to get tossed into the trash? Who was even behind getting those put together?
Free advertising for BIG and the illusion that something was actually happening for the Penguins.
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:07 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.