PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by GeneW

Pretty impressive set of Résumés.

"A native of South Oakland . . ."

"A native of Pittsburgh . . ."

"A native of Southwestern Pennsylvania . . ."

"A native and life-long resident of Pittsburgh . . ."

"A native and life-long resident of Pittsburgh . . ."

"A native of Braddock . . ."

Bunch of yinze---just kidding!

(although it is pretty funny the lone Hispanic is the one non-native--she is from Cuba and then Florida)

Anyway, all that aside, it is in fact a solid-looking team.

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by deja vu

I recently received a brochure in the mail from Carnegie Mellon about the new University Expansion Center. Cannon Design is the architect. To date, these are the only renderings I've seen of the project, and though very schematic, give a sense of how this addition will appear from Forbes Avenue. The additional performance, rehearsal, and fitness space is badly needed by the campus.

One thing I question is where the service entrances, loading docks, etc. will fit into the new scheme.

Here's an article from CMU's "The Tartan" in September 2013 with some extra info.

Current View:

I was thinking of a more cost effective and relevant idea for the tech gods of CMU...

[Austinlee]

I personally hate color schemes like this one. Especially these colors. Purple and Orange?? Really? If you had to ask me to put together the worst two colors I could think of it would be Purple and Orange.

[Steel City Scotty]

Aaron -- my apologies for using the term, but if any of you haven't seen any of the extremely popular, "Pittsburgh Dad," videos on YouTube, that's probably a great positive example of a "yinzer."

He's portrayed as a lovable family man who while not overly well educated, is passionate about his sports teams, likes to poke fun at his neighbors and can amusingly get fired up about the ways of today's generation. The "comments" sections below the videos are always filled with Pittsburghers from around the country who share stories of how much the character brings back memories from their childhood with their parents.

Anyway, I know the videos aren't for everybody, but the creators started with a simple idea and have become pretty big local celebrities over the course of the past couple of years.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by Steel City Scotty

Aaron -- my apologies for using the term, but if any of you haven't seen any of the extremely popular, "Pittsburgh Dad," videos on YouTube, that's probably a great positive example of a "yinzer."

He's portrayed as a lovable family man who while not overly well educated, is passionate about his sports teams, likes to poke fun at his neighbors and can amusingly get fired up about the ways of today's generation. The "comments" sections below the videos are always filled with Pittsburghers from around the country who share stories of how much the character brings back memories from their childhood with their parents.

Anyway, I know the videos aren't for everybody, but the creators started with a simple idea and have become pretty big local celebrities over the course of the past couple of years.

I'm with you. Pittsburgh Dad is absolutely hilarious!

Aaron (Glowrock)

[glowrock]

So, back to the Produce Terminal building. This article discusses something I was very afraid of, that Buncher will just sit on the land for potentially decades, not developing any of it and of course waiting to sell the property for many times what it's worth, meaning it will lie fallow for seemingly forever. All because of roughly 500' of the newer portion of the Produce Terminal. I know I'm nearly alone in my opinion around here on this issue, but I would truly rather see blocks of surface lots be developed instead of saving the less historic 500' of a super-long building that pretty much completely blocks off the riverfront area from the rest of the Strip District. Perhaps this is just Buncher blowing off steam, perhaps it isn't. Who knows?

http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/5026114-74/project-terminal-building#axzz2jxaUmPDP


Aaron (Glowrock)

[BrianTH]

Up until now, Buncher had been singing a different tune. I agree if it is really a choice between no development at all or losing 1/3 of the Produce Terminal, we should lose the 1/3. But it doesn't really make sense that those are the only two choices, and so the question is whether Buncher in this letter is just bluffing (and I would note it appears there is a lot of hedging in the letter).

Edit:

This P-G article points out the "walk away" portion of the letter was ambiguous in that it could mean just the terminal part of the project, or the whole thing:

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2...or-terminal-opposed/stories/201311080165

[BrianTH]

Article on the Strip hotel proposal:

http://www.post-gazette.com/business/201...-for-Strip-District/stories/201311080094

The article also notes Giant Eagle is considering being the tenant in the new Saks-site garage. As I believe we have discussed before, that potentially makes a lot of sense, particularly if they get some dedicated parking spots. Even if not, it is a very central location, and could provide prepared foods for a lunch crowd using the renovated Mellon Square (which as of now would be under-served relative to places like Market Square).

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Up until now, Buncher had been singing a different tune. I agree if it is really a choice between no development at all or losing 1/3 of the Produce Terminal, we should lose the 1/3. But it doesn't really make sense that those are the only two choices, and so the question is whether Buncher in this letter is just bluffing (and I would note it appears there is a lot of hedging in the letter).

Edit:

This P-G article points out the "walk away" portion of the letter was ambiguous in that it could mean just the terminal part of the project, or the whole thing:

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2...or-terminal-opposed/stories/201311080165

Agreed. There's still a lot of uncertainty here, potentially even more so now with Peduto as incoming mayor. I tend to think that Peduto's going to get everyone together and force some sort of a compromise arrangement. But again, I'm just not sure about anything here. It's the ongoing saga that just won't come to a logical conclusion!

Aaron (Glowrock)

[Evergrey]

I say the city should capitulate to Buncher's demands.

[DKNewYork]

Originally Posted by glowrock

So, back to the Produce Terminal building. This article discusses something I was very afraid of, that Buncher will just sit on the land for potentially decades, not developing any of it and of course waiting to sell the property for many times what it's worth, meaning it will lie fallow for seemingly forever. All because of roughly 500' of the newer portion of the Produce Terminal. I know I'm nearly alone in my opinion around here on this issue, but I would truly rather see blocks of surface lots be developed instead of saving the less historic 500' of a super-long building that pretty much completely blocks off the riverfront area from the rest of the Strip District. Perhaps this is just Buncher blowing off steam, perhaps it isn't. Who knows?

http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/5026114-74/project-terminal-building#axzz2jxaUmPDP

Aaron (Glowrock)

I don't think you are so alone in your opinion. My sense is that most people want a compromise (and that, I think, includes most posters on this page). They want the riverfront site developed and, to get that done, will give up the western third of the terminal, particularly given the deteriorated condition of the building and the unique challenges that its redevelopment poses. I had been previously told that Buncher will have no problem walking away and simply sitting on the riverfront property. The cash flow from the parking concession is significant. They can wait.

I noted the online comments from Rob Pfaffman. He has previously told numerous people in the loop that he has a developer who will take on the Terminal project. Yeah, just like he did with the Civic Arena. I hope he is not just talking but he always leaves me with that sense.

[SkyPittsburgh]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

I say the city should capitulate to Buncher's demands.

While I agree if this was any old building, I disagree based on the fact that this building is important to the strip district. We shouldn't get rid of assets to give into plain development.

[DKNewYork]

I am intrigued at what the city does if Buncher does walk away from the Terminal. The URA bought the building, which it desperately wants to unload, in the 80s. While it is impressive and historic, it is empty and deteriorated, with few obvious redevelopment options and no prospective buyers. Carrying costs are increasing and it generates no income. So what is their next step?

Brian, I think that this situation rather than the Millcraft/Saks development might be the early litmus test of Peduto...he can make difference here. Perhaps come out in favor of the Buncher plan in return for the changes to the master plan that we have all wanted (more height, less surface parking, etc). I can confirm that Buncher and the mayor-elect have met a few times, so this is probably a front burner issue to Peduto, which is good.

[themaguffin]

There should be some moderate height. If that isn't in Buncher's plan, then it that should be a change if he were to get his wish regarding the Terminal building.

[bevansr]

It is about time they open up the Wabash Tunnel to all traffic. I will be interested to see how many vehicles use that now compared to the current numbers as an HOV lane.

("About 500 vehicles a day use the tunnel on weekdays. About 300 a day use it on weekends")

http://www.wpxi.com/news/news/local/wabash-tunnel-open-all-motorists-until-december-20/nbkYW/

[DKNewYork]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

I say the city should capitulate to Buncher's demands.

Not capitulate---that gives up the building's western third and leaves us with a suburban development along the river. Rather, the new mayor should take advantage of the position he finds himself in...leverage his support to make the Buncher plan better.

[WillyC]

Originally Posted by DKNewYork

I noted the online comments from Rob Pfaffman. He has previously told numerous people in the loop that he has a developer who will take on the Terminal project. Yeah, just like he did with the Civic Arena. I hope he is not just talking but he always leaves me with that sense.

Can someone let Rob know the Astrodome is about to be leveled and needs a savior?

All kidding aside, the Buncher/Strip project is a disaster. I'd like to think Peduto can fix this, but this project and the heated emotion on both sides have already sunk it I believe. I think Buncher will just sit on the land and punish the city for cutting the legs of this project out from underneath them.

[DKNewYork]

Originally Posted by WillyC

Can someone let Rob know the Astrodome is about to be leveled and needs a savior?

All kidding aside, the Buncher/Strip project is a disaster. I'd like to think Peduto can fix this, but this project and the heated emotion on both sides have already sunk it I believe. I think Buncher will just sit on the land and punish the city for cutting the legs of this project out from underneath them.

Do you mean the project is a PR disaster or a urban planning disaster?

Re the former: Granted, there are heated emotions on both sides but that was bound to happen. I would hope that Buncher is savvy enough to realize that these types of hurdles are to be expected, particularly when dealing with a well-known and (to a lesser extent) well-loved publicly-owned building. Buncher comes out ahead if they play the game correctly and move forward with the complete development, and their announcement yesterday is all part of that. While they make money on the land as parking, they will make more with the land developed. Profit motive should trump the desire to punish the city.

Re the latter: No one but Buncher seems to like their plans for the riverfront property. But I have been told by two people involved that Buncher is open to making the plan more pedestrian-oriented, more urban and more dense. So the prospect of historic landmark status for the Terminal gives Peduto greater leverage to have those desired plan revisions to be incorporated.

[DKNewYork]

Originally Posted by SkyPittsburgh

While I agree if this was any old building, I disagree based on the fact that this building is important to the strip district. We shouldn't get rid of assets to give into plain development.

What if the Buncher plan for the riverfront property is improved? Would that make the sacrifice of the western third of the Terminal acceptable to you? Just curious if the building is sacrosanct or negotiable.

[BrianTH]

I agree the Produce Terminal issue is another good litmus test for Peduto. The Saks-site situation is a bit unique in that the Ravenstahl Administration tried to orchestrate a bait-and-switch in favor of its buddies, so that presents a very specific sort of challenge/test for Peduto. The Produce Terminal issue goes to a more basic question of whether Peduto can broker acceptable deals between legitimately-opposed interests.

By the way, if Peduto could trade approval of Buncher's plan for the Produce Terminal for a higher minimum height (or minimum units, etc.) in the apartment blocks, I'd embrace that deal in a New York minute. The new hotel proposal looks to be for 8 stories, and I'd love to see that be the new minimum number of stories for the apartment blocks (which would mean they would at least approximately match the Cork Factory in scale).