PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

I like how the addition looks from the outside--it is well-integrated with the existing building, and to me gives the hotel a sort of nautical, sailboatish look from several angles.

Agreed. Well worth the wait.

[WePA]

There's been some speculation as to why Pitt's building projects are tame compared to CMU's. It may be worth noting that Nordenberg Hall is located in the Schenley Farms Historic District, and as a result had to have a design that jived with the historic character of the other historically significant, beautiful historic buildings in this historic district.

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

Agreed. Well worth the wait.

lol

[Austinlee]

Here is a great article about the Fort Pitt Blvd design competition, also referencing the Oxford development, the relocation of the US Steel HQ, and others... I posted a detailed comment in the PG comments. You could do the same if you want to support the new developments that are being discussed.


Burns & Scalo, Oxford Development vie for Downtown Pittsburgh visibility

April 26, 2013 12:39 am
By Mark Belko / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Forget Smithfield Street. Forget the Strip District. Forget the former Civic Arena site. James Scalo says he knows where the next skyscraper will be built Downtown -- right on his land.

For the past three years, Mr. Scalo, president and CEO of Burns & Scalo Real Estate Services, has been marketing the 29,000-square-foot parking lot on Fort Pitt Boulevard near Smithfield Street to potential office users.

So far, he has gotten no takers. But he believes that will change.

"This will be the next high-rise in Pittsburgh," he said boldly Thursday as he surveyed the parking lot. "Nobody's going [elsewhere Downtown] when you can come here. Location. Location. Location."

Mr. Scalo might get an argument from Oxford Development Co., which is marketing a site on Smithfield Street between Fifth and Forbes avenues for a new skyscraper, or the Pittsburgh Penguins, who are preparing to develop the 28-acre former arena property, or the Buncher Co., which has plans for offices and residences on a riverfront parcel in the Strip District.

But Mr. Scalo maintained that his site has greater visibility and better access to highways than the others do. The Scalo property is located a block or two from ramps to the parkways east and west and faces the Monongahela riverfront. A new building would be visible from Mount Washington and the Fort Pitt Bridge.

"It's a perimeter lot with river views. In commercial real estate, sight lines and views really dictate desire and value," he said.

Burns & Scalo bought the parking lot and the adjacent 132,500-square-foot One Smithfield Street building from Allegheny County for $11.4 million in late 2009. The county rents space in the building under a 20-year lease. A separate 20-year lease governs the parking lot, but Burns & Scalo has the ability to terminate that agreement with a year's notice, Mr. Scalo said.

For several years, the company has been marketing the parking lot for a 300,000-square-foot building with lower level parking. Burns & Scalo has the ability to go as high as 18 stories at the location, perhaps higher with a variance, Mr. Scalo said.

Both U.S. Steel and Chevron, he said, have considered the location for a potential headquarters, he said.

U.S. Steel is thinking about leaving its longtime home in U.S. Steel Tower for a new location when its lease expires in 2017. The Post-Gazette reported in September that the corporation is considering the 37-acre parcel in the Strip owned by Buncher and a 116-acre property off McClaren Road in Findlay. At the same time, it has not ruled out staying at its current location on Grant Street.

Mr. Scalo said U.S. Steel has told him that it is looking for more of a horizontal campus-like headquarters than a vertical office tower.

"If they were going to build new Downtown, this would have been it," he said. "Nobody knows what they're doing yet. Who knows? Maybe they'll come back."

The city and the county, Mr. Scalo said, would like to see U.S. Steel move to the Civic Arena site if it doesn't stay in U.S. Steel Tower.

County Executive Rich Fitzgerald said he has talked to the corporation about the arena site as well as the Buncher property in the Strip. "We would love to have a major presence like U.S. Steel be part of [the arena development]. Whether that fits into their overall plans remains to be seen," he said. "It certainly would be a good fit."

What's most important, he added, is that the steelmaker stay Downtown, he said.

U.S. Steel has been tight-lipped about its plans. In a statement Thursday, it said, "We're currently exploring several alternatives in order to arrive at the best long-term business solution for our company."

Mr. Scalo said Chevron also considered his property for a headquarters before settling on a potential location in Moon.

He noted that one of the drawbacks to building Downtown is that a developer has to charge $38 to $40 a square foot in rent to pay for the construction, much higher than a company would have to pay in the suburbs or even for the top class A space in the Golden Triangle.

Burns & Scalo has no plans to build without a tenant in hand. Banks typically won't lend for a high-rise office construction unless the developer has at least 40 to 50 percent of the building pre-leased.

While Mr. Scalo said he is "not actively talking to anyone" about building at the Fort Pitt Boulevard site, but he doesn't think it will be long before that changes.
With natural gas prices rising again, he believes more energy companies will be looking for space in Pittsburgh -- and Downtown, specifically.

"There are a lot of people looking to come here. It will happen," he said. "I would be surprised if in the next five years we don't have anyone."........

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/busi...tsburgh-visibility-685127/#ixzz2RanwHJUU

[Austinlee]

Approx 17 floors (Possibly more if awarded a height variance)
Approx 300,000 sq ft with 1st floor river view restaurant; Underground parking



[/URL]













http://www.gbbn.com/Projects/Community/Burns_%26_Scalo~Monongahela_Tower/

[BrianTH]

I actually found that article pretty depressing, since apparently no progress has been made on finding an anchor tenant.

[Evergrey]

US Steel is lame. They can go ahead and build their "horizontal campus" out in exurban Weirton for all I care.

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

I actually found that article pretty depressing, since apparently no progress has been made on finding an anchor tenant.

Agreed. It was a depressing, confounding and aggravating read.

[themaguffin]

If they do build, has that design been awarded the one? - I hope so because even at that height, it would be a sharp looking addition to the face of that end of downtown and look great even from Mt Washington I think.

I don't view the article as depressing, though I agree that I wish progress would be made on a tenant, but the fact that a couple groups are actively pursuing new towers is a nice change.

Hopefully what will work in their favor is that it's really not a big tower, so hopefully than can find someone to give them enough leverage to get this going...

[Jonboy1983]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

US Steel is lame. They can go ahead and build their "horizontal campus" out in exurban Weirton for all I care.

I understand their desire for a more horizontal campus-like setting versus a highrise in terms of the amount of leasable space per floor, but I still don't find them all that attractive from an urban planning perspective.

While some business parks may seem rather cutting-edge and enticing, to me they still scream "small buildings surrounded by a sea of parking." If they do choose to move out of US Steel Tower, then why not stay downtown?

Or, suppose they decide to keep their lease at US Steel Tower, why not find leasable class A space in an adjacent building, either existing or proposed? I'm sure they wouldn't mind taking some space in at least part of a building (or group of buildings) on the Arena site, the Strip, or elsewhere in the Downtown area...

For the record, I think a new cluster of buildings on the Buncher property ranging from 18 to 30 stories would be pretty sweet...

[KINGPIN]

Official Vegas Odds:

Civic Arena Site 100/100 (without skyscraper)
Burns & Scalo 80/20
Oxford 50/50
Buncher 25/75 (looking like the RR and the courts will kill it)
One Grandview 5/95

[Jonboy1983]

Originally Posted by KINGPIN

Official Vegas Odds:

Civic Arena Site 100/100 (without skyscraper)

Boo! I think a high-rise here, something in the 20-to-30 story range would do well here.

Burns & Scalo 80/20

My thinking as well
[quote]50/50[quote]
I'm still pulling for the 33-story option here.

Buncher 25/75 (looking like the RR and the courts will kill it)
One Grandview 5/95

Yeah. I saw the article about that. Does not look good... Here, again, at least in the portion closest to downtown, I think a highrise really makes sense. I'd put a maximum at the other end, however, in the 12-16 story range...

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by themaguffin

I don't view the article as depressing, though I agree that I wish progress would be made on a tenant, but the fact that a couple groups are actively pursuing new towers is a nice change.

The problem is this project has been on hold since 2009, so in this location at least, that as-yet merely aspirational change has gotten a little stale.

In other words, I, at least, have officially gone from the "Cool, a new project!" stage to the "So is this thing ever going to actually happen?" stage. And when you are in that stage, this sort of article is just salt in the wound.

[Steel City Scotty]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

The problem is this project has been on hold since 2009, so in this location at least, that as-yet merely aspirational change has gotten a little stale.

In other words, I, at least, have officially gone from the "Cool, a new project!" stage to the "So is this thing ever going to actually happen?" stage. And when you are in that stage, this sort of article is just salt in the wound.

That's how I feel about the One Grandview project. I really want to see that get built, but as more time passes by, it's looking more and more unlikely.

[Steel City Scotty]

Originally Posted by Steel City Scotty

After six years, it's almost finally complete...

One reader mentioned that the swimming pool didn't look very impressive in the video attached to the link about the renovations at the Wyndham, and after watching it myself, I think I have to agree. It seemed to be quite small.

I usually get frustrated by negativity and cynical comments at the bottom of an online article, especially after I was excited to read about the completion of this project. But, I did find it strange that the hotel's swimming pool looked so tiny.

[markson33]

Originally Posted by KINGPIN

Official Vegas Odds:

Civic Arena Site 100/100 (without skyscraper)
Yeah - don't expect anything over 15 stories. And (unless USS goes there) it will take 20 years to complete.
Burns & Scalo 80/20
Probably more like 40/60 - B&S is full of BS - they probably didnt even talk to USS because USS needs between 500-900,0000 sf, which cant fit on that site.
Oxford 50/50
I'm think more like 60-40 - they wouldn't be taking this long to decide if they weren't deep into negotiations. I hear they have two potential tenants.
Buncher 25/75 (looking like the RR and the courts will kill it)
I would put this at 70/30 - Buncher is going to develop that land eventually
One Grandview 5/95

I agree that it's unlikely, but the hotel market is pretty good, so I'll give them 30/70 odds.

[miked_6]

Morning everyone. I just wanted to introduce myself, I'm a senior at Pitt and I've been reading this thread since it had about 50 pages; everyone does such a fantastic job keeping things updated. I live in Friendship, and it's impressive the amount of construction and rehabilitation I can walk to.

I'm excited to see Don Allen (Hyatt House) is beginning to be dismantled, the 2nd story aluminum cladding started being removed this past week. Fingers crossed on the old Mazda dealership, its looking a little too 'Life After People' when walking past.

Anyone from Bloomfield? There was a community meeting at Cafe Sam on Wednesday discussing the plans for the triangle plot diagonal from the future Hyatt House on Baum. I had a final and wasn't able to attend but the plans were going to be presented to the community.

Take it easy

[Steel City Scotty]

Welcome to the boards, Miked!

It's nice to have you join our online Pittsburgh Development community of friends.

[daviderik]

Originally Posted by Steel City Scotty

One reader mentioned that the swimming pool didn't look very impressive in the video attached to the link about the renovations at the Wyndham, and after watching it myself, I think I have to agree. It seemed to be quite small.

I usually get frustrated by negativity and cynical comments at the bottom of an online article, especially after I was excited to read about the completion of this project. But, I did find it strange that the hotel's swimming pool looked so tiny.

Agreed. I assumed this was a secondary pool.

[ks2006]

Originally Posted by Jonboy1983

I understand their desire for a more horizontal campus-like setting versus a highrise in terms of the amount of leasable space per floor, but I still don't find them all that attractive from an urban planning perspective.

I've actually never really understood the big advantage of a large horizontal layout from a logistics perspective. For example, in a highrise, sure you may need to get in an elevator to get to a certain location. But then you have generally a quick walk to anywhere on that floor.

In an office park type building, you may not only have to get into an elevator, you may also have to walk 1,000 feet once you get to the desired floor. Same goes for getting to your desk from the parking lot.

Is a horizontal layout economically advantageous enough to overcome this?