Excellent news for both the Frick Museum/Grounds expansion and renovation, as well as obviously for the Oliver Building Embassy Suites Hotel announcement! So nice to see confirmation of another Downtown hotel, with a couple of additional ones on the drawing boards or nearly confirmed!
Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"Deeply corrupt but still semi-functional - it's the Chicago way." -- Barrelfish
Planners approve zoning for massive Hazelwood project at LTV site
May 28, 2013 4:24 pm
Share with others:
0
inShare
By Mark Belko / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
The proposed redevelopment of the former LTV coke works in Hazelwood advanced today with Pittsburgh Planning Commission approval of a zoning change and site plans.
Commission members voted 6-0 to approve a change in the zoning from general industry to a specially planned district and a preliminary land development plan for the 178-acre site on the Monongahela River. The zoning change now goes before city council for approval.
The approvals help to clear the way for the Regional Industrial Development Corp. to award contracts worth about $7 million for site grading, the first step toward redeveloping the site.
Here is an interesting article on The Atlantic Cities website (vid on website):
Videos
The Pittsburgh Pirates Videos That'll Make You Kind of Love the City
Mark Byrnes
May 03, 2013
Sports teams' in-house videos tend to err (quite firmly) on the side of corny and over-dramatic. But this season, the Pittsburgh Pirates have rolled out a string of city-centric scoreboard videos that are actually kind of nice to watch.The team introduces its starting line ups in the style of Saturday Night Live's opening credits, using fast-paced, nighttime city imagery to set the scene as players casually introduce themselves to the camera.
The video that displays before it might be even better. "Shadows of the City" is the official intro video, played each game night right before the team takes the field. The video intersperses game footage with a bevy of signature Pittsburgh imagery, including its neighborhoods, light rail, and the city's vast collection no-frills bars and restaurants.
Walnut on Highland (the renovated Highland Building in East Liberty) is now renting, and there are a bunch of floorplans and photos available (the Facebook page has the best photos):
Strip District produce terminal nominated as historic structure in bid to halt demolition
May 29, 2013 10:24 am
By Mark Belko / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Preservation Pittsburgh has nominated the Strip District's historic produce terminal as a city historic structure in an effort to stop a third of it from being demolished.
The nomination comes in response to an application filed by the Buncher Company in April to raze the western third of the building as part of an ambitious riverfront development plan. The city's Bureau of Building Inspection has yet to act on the application.
Joining Preservation Pittsburgh in nominating the building is architect Sarah Kroloff of Lawrenceville.
The nomination now goes before the city's historic review commission for consideration. It also must be reviewed by the city planning commission and City Council.
The terminal, a Strip landmark that has been home to the city's wholesale produce industry for decades, is owned by the city's Urban Redevelopment Authority.
Buncher has an option agreement to purchase it for $1.8 million. The URA has said that Buncher can't move forward with the demolition until it has purchased the property.
The developer wants to raze the western third of the building to clear a path to connect 17th Street to the riverfront as part of a proposed residential and office development.
And this is a huge mistake. Preservationists are barking up the wrong tree when it comes to this one. Reducing a gigantic, ugly, one-story behemoth from roughly 1500' to roughly 1000' is not exactly what I'd call a full demolition. Why in the hell is this being so bitterly fought? I understand the issues against Buncher in general, but they don't even seem to be related to their proposals for the Riverfront property at all. They seem far more due to their past developments, period.
The Produce Terminal is definitely NOT worthy of such actions. Focus on the real issue of demolitions involving historic structures, of which there are many around Pittsburgh. The Produce Terminal is about as historic as a 1950's office building around here. It's not even remotely old by Pittsburgh standards!
Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"Deeply corrupt but still semi-functional - it's the Chicago way." -- Barrelfish
I definitely think large parts of the Produce Terminal could and should be preserved in some form, but it should also be modified to make it less of a barrier. All things considered I might prefer doing pass-throughs rather than removing 1/3, but either is OK with me.
Anyway, I'm not sure what end-game these people have in mind. Certainly no modifications at all would suck, and I doubt they can achieve that result (see, e.g., the Civic Arena).
I am 100 percent for preservation. That building is an icon to the city and it think its incredible. If the developer thinks having to god forbid drive an extra two blocks to get around it then fuck him.
I think a good middle ground would be cutting out a section of the produce terminal to allow 17th street to be connected to the riverfront- but still keeping the 1/3rd part of the produce terminal to the west of it instead of tearing that part down completely. Part of me thinks that has been Buncher's plan all along too. They have to know that tearing down 1/3rd of a historic building is going to cause a ruckus, and they might be planning to concede the idea so as to show that they're working with the community's concerns, or whatever. Or to take the attention away from other aspects of their development- like the whole gated community thing in the residential portion.
I wouldn't be adverse to pass-thrus being cut in the building to allow cross streets to get built but Buncher seems to want to demolish a lot more than that.
I am 100 percent for preservation. That building is an icon to the city and it think its incredible. If the developer thinks having to god forbid drive an extra two blocks to get around it then fuck him.
Without either a partial demolition or at least allocating pass-throughs for the streets to get through the building, more than 50% of the riverfront land is essentially blocked off from the Strip District. It doesn't bode well for development of that vast tract of surface lots not to have any level of visibility to Smallman St.. I too want to see a good part of the building preserved, but if it takes either a 1/3 demolition or some sort of pass-throughs in order to bring about much-needed development of those horrible surface lots, it's a "loss" I'm willing to accept. If Buncher were to propose demolishing the whole thing, then of course I'd be 100% against that!
Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"Deeply corrupt but still semi-functional - it's the Chicago way." -- Barrelfish
The Koppers Building, an Andrew Mellon-commissioned Art Deco office tower dating to the 1920s that’s still home to its namesake, is being marketed for sale.
A few weeks ago, Gerry Dudley and Ryan Sciullo of the Pittsburgh office of CBRE sent an email blast announcing they were representing the building for sale.
A 34-story skyscraper completed in 1929, the Koppers Building totals 356,439 square feet in size and is 69.4 percent occupied, according to CBRE, with publicly traded construction materials company Koppers Inc. committed as an anchor tenant with a long-term lease.
Located at the corner of Grant Street and Seventh Avenue in the heart of downtown, the Koppers building is being billed by CBRE as a building with strong opportunity to add value by potential investors given the tight central business district office market, rising rents and job growth.
A list price for the building was not provided in the marketing email.
The building is owned by an entity named Koppers Building Holdings Inc., based in Radnor, Delaware County, in suburban Philadelphia, according to state and county records.
According to those records, the current ownership has held the building since 1997, when it bought the property for $13.2 million.
The building’s assessed value for 2013 is $17 million, down from $19.1 million in 2012, according to county real estate records.
I went on a walk today through Shadyside and East Liberty and took pictures of some stuff. Here is a kind of long photo post, but it shows where alot of the development projects are at in the area.
New Aldi in Shadyside on Baum
Giant Eagle Market District expansion
Bovie House on Ellsworth
Newly renovated building on Ellsworth. Home to Umi
The little "articulation" building right over the bridge from the Whole foods if getting reclad and interior renovations. No idea what is going in it.
Highland Ave Bridge over Busway
Walnut on Highland is getting close to begin finished
Stopped in the East Liberty Presbyterian Church and found this jem on the wall. New landscaping to be done this summer. They are also going to put up electronic signage.
East End Community House, across from the Home Depot, is getting there.
Hotel indigo is still just an empty plot of land and some empty buildings, but the area around it is really filling in with restaurants and stores. (p.s. that white building that is in the back of the block is absolutely stunning. I hope it isn't getting torn down)
And as an extra here are some strange artworks i stumbled across in East Liberty.
Great pictures, dollar. Pertaining to the produce terminal, I support the preservation group's actions only in so far as they might make Buncher rethink their plans one more time.
If the developer thinks having to god forbid drive an extra two blocks to get around it . . .
The issue is more about walking than driving, and in that context it does in fact make a significant difference if you would have to walk around the ends.
I wouldn't be adverse to pass-thrus being cut in the building to allow cross streets to get built but Buncher seems to want to demolish a lot more than that.
It seems to me it is a reasonably close call from a preservationist perspective--if you cut multiple pass-throughs you are actually going to do more to change each part of the building, whereas just shortening it means the remaining part can be left closer to the original.
I'd still prefer pass-throughs, but largely because I'd like more frequent connections to the river, and I think they could be cool, rather than thinking there is a strong preservationist case for that approach.
Prev
Linear Mode
