PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[BrianTH]

It is a bummer they couldn't save the Penn Lincoln, but the PHLF and Wilkinsburg really did everything they could do to find a way to reuse it--it was just too far gone.

On the plus side, a good new development in that location could potentially help save a number of other nearby historic structures in dire need of reinvestment.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Jonboy1983

From the looks of that article, there doesn't seem to be anything planned.

I don't think there is a developer lined up or anything like that, but my understanding is that the PHLF, Wilkinsburg, and the County do in fact have some specific ideas for the site, and intend to do something like an RFP along those lines.

Edit: Older article on the subject:

http://triblive.com/home/2125378-74/buil...nt-million-projects-square#axzz2kZP7eFBr

The Wilkinsburg project, by Landmarks Development Corp., part of the Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, will be used for environmental remediation necessary to demolish the building. After the building is demolished, plans are to construct a “new high-quality building” on a scale of the existing buildings on Penn Avenue business district. Demolition cost is $580,715.

The state previously approved $88,215 for project, said State Sen. Jim Ferlo, D-Highland Park.

“We tested the market, both commercial and residential, to determine any interest in the building, once it was renovated, but found no interest. Our studies showed that the cost of renovating the building, which once also was used as apartments, was cost prohibited, and our attempts to find financial sources for the work were unsuccessful,” said Arthur Ziegler, president, Pittsburgh History and Landmarks.

“We are committed, once the building is demolished, to build an appropriate new building, with perhaps retail on the first level and offices above,” he said.

If the building is demolished, it will end its reign as the largest structure in the Wilkinsburg business district. The 70,000-square-foot structure was designed by architect Benno Janssen, who also was the architect for the William Penn Hotel and the former Kaufmann's Department Store (now Macy's), both Downtown, and the Pittsburgh Athletic Club.

It has been vacant for more than 15 years and, after several studies, was found to be too costly to repair. All of its windows are broken, and some windows, as well as bricks, have fallen to the sidewalk, creating a possible danger for pedestrians.

[photoLith]

No development justifies the tearing down of an historic structure. Because whatever will replace it will be ugly, modern, and will lack any sense of architectural prowess.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by photoLith

No development justifies the tearing down of an historic structure. Because whatever will replace it will be ugly, modern, and will lack any sense of architectural prowess.

Even if the new building does end up lacking the charm of the old building back when the old building was actually in use, I don't think you can require Wilkinsburg to keep in place the unsafe ruins of the old building as a memorial to itself.

And again, big picture wise, a successful redevelopment here could help save a lot of other historic structures (there are many such in Wilkinsburg, but a lot of them are heading in a bad way for lack of investment).

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by photoLith

No development justifies the tearing down of an historic structure. Because whatever will replace it will be ugly, modern, and will lack any sense of architectural prowess.

You know as well as I do that isn't necessarily true. First of all, if the building was too forgone structurally to be saved, there isn't much that could have really been done to begin with. Secondly, leaving an abandoned structure in place in the hopes that, some day a long time down the road, perhaps a renovation/restoration might be feasible isn't something that Wilkinsburg should have to carry the burden of, especially given that the building is likely a major liability at this point in terms of insurance costs. Thirdly, there's no evidence that any new development will automatically be ugly, modern and lack any sense of architectural prowess.

Look, I hate seeing architecturally and historically significant structures demolished just like you do. But I'm also realistic in that not everything can be saved, and perhaps new development can help pay for the restoration of other structures that are feasible for reuse. One lost building can potentially save numerous other structures.

Again, thankfully we're not talking about Houston, where nearly anything more than 50 years old has been utterly destroyed/demolished. We're talking about Pittsburgh, home to literally tens of thousands of 100+ year old buildings. I completely respect your enthusiasm and passion, but again, Pittsburgh's not Houston. Pittsburgh seems to WANT to save as many historic buildings as it can. Houston, well, I think the horse and carriage has already left town, unfortunately.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by MattofSloppyVariety

I drove past the Penn Lincoln hotel in Wilkinsburg today and they are putting up fencing around it. Not sure if that means it's a good or bad thing for that building.

Originally Posted by Evergrey

bad thing

Federal Community Development Block Grant

AKA... the instrument used to destroy architecture and density in American industrial cities

[MattofSloppyVariety]

I find it weird that they are saying it would cost too much to reuse the building, but they were able to save the Crescent which was just as bad, if not worse that the Penn Lincoln. I mean look at the pictures of the interior.

http://www.landmarkspreservation.org/work/wilkinsburg/the-crescent/

[Jonboy1983]

Originally Posted by MattofSloppyVariety

I find it weird that they are saying it would cost too much to reuse the building, but they were able to save the Crescent which was just as bad, if not worse that the Penn Lincoln. I mean look at the pictures of the interior.

http://www.landmarkspreservation.org/work/wilkinsburg/the-crescent/

I see your argument here, but maybe the circumstances were different between the Crescent and Penn-Lincoln.

For starters, the Crescent is shorter; only three levels, while the Penn Lincoln is six stories. I think height is a factor in determining renovation/restoration cost versus demolition. Construction type I think would be another factor -- just to name a few here.

I'm no structural engineer here, I'm just trying to figure out the reasoning...

BTW, I love those pics of the Crescent. They tell a story of renovation from start to finish. Those units look impressive!

[BrianTH]

I think the Crescent's brick work was in better shape, but I suspect it was mostly a difference in height and overall scale, plus the difference in available financing. Even at a considerably smaller scale, the Crescent was still a very expensive project, and was made possible only by a lot of public and private financing tied to it being a lower-income housing project:

http://www.fhlb-pgh.com/housing-and-community/real-life-stories/ahp_rl_73.html

The $8.6 million project was financed in part by a $300,000 grant from FHLBank Pittsburgh’s Affordable Housing Program (AHP) through member PNC Bank, N.A. Project financing included an additional $1.6 million from PNC Bank, $5.3 million from the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency and $1.4 million from ACED and Allegheny County Supportive Services.

Generally, I don't know all the details by any means, but I do know the PHLF and Wilkinsburg made a long, sustained effort to find a viable reuse plan for the Penn-Lincoln. They put considerable funds into studies, and they spent years working on it, before finally deciding it couldn't be done. I don't think you can always trust decision-makers on these issues, but in this case I am personally confident this was a decision they only made with great reluctance, after doing everything possible to find an alternative.

[BrianTH]

Just keeping up to date, the next step for the Downtown/Oakland/East End BRT project is to fund an engineering study, and they are targeting a September 2004 application for federal funding:

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/transpo...-rapid-transit-line/stories/201311140262

New to me, this is a pretty slick promotional video. I could quibble with some aspects of the pitch, but overall it makes a compelling case:

http://vimeo.com/72923583

[BrianTH]

So the Buhl Foundation is going to focus more on providing grants to the North Side, moving its target from 20% to 80%:

http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/5057044-74/buhl-north-foundation#axzz2kdCc8EWa

I think this is a great idea--it is not a huge foundation, but this change in focus could make a meaningful difference in terms of the pace at which various proposals get funded. Just in terms of numbers, they apparently gave away about $3.5 million last year (which makes sense given their reported endowment of about $90 million), so 20% to 80% means going from around $700K to $2.8 million, and I bet that additional $2.1 million annually spread around to various North Side proposals could quickly add up to a lot of positive change.

I also think the North Side is one of those parts of Pittsburgh that is already heading in a good direction but still has a LOT more potential, such that increasing the pace of its redevelopment could benefit the whole City and region.

[BrianTH]

Local officials, including Peduto, are trying to woo a Slovenian LED company that is looking for a manufacturing location in the U.S.:

http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/5062930-74/grah-peduto-plant#axzz2kdCc8EWa

Most interesting to me was that they specifically looked at the ALMONO site in Hazelwood--it wouldn't be bad to jump start that project with a new occupied building at the same time the infrastructure phase is complete--and also the Crucible Steel building.

The Crucible Steel building has gone through a bunch of possible plans and last I knew they were actually thinking residential--personally, I'd prefer to see that happen, and this LED company go in the ALMONO site, but either would be fine.

[BrianTH]

Courtesy of Chris Briem, the chart in this article shows that there has been a net-inflow of "Millenials" into the Pittsburgh MSA during the post-recession period:

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/11/1...gton-after-abandoning-city-in-recession/

Notably the overall movement of Millenials nationwide is still low by historic standards for people of their age range, which is likely because the recession and slow recovery has depressed their ability to move. However, the fact that Pittsburgh is now ranking relatively well on a list like this (#20 among the top 51 metros for the post-recession period) with a positive trend suggests that it stands to benefit even more as the recovery continues and Millenial mobility (likely) increases. Given the observable trends in housing preference among Millenials, all this specifically bodes well for more urban, walkable, and transit-friendly locations, which in turn means we should likely expect new multi-unit developments in such areas to continue to find tenants with relative ease.

Edit: By the way, Washington and Baltimore, particularly Washington, are also net gainers in the post-recession period. However, otherwise the big Northeast Coast metros (Boston, Providence, Hartford, NYC, and Philly) are all net losers. Some of that is business as usual--in particular cities which are big immigration gateways often see regular domestic outmigration--but still, I think it remains true that high housing prices in the Northeast Coast, particularly in otherwise desirable urban core locations, create opportunities for much more affordable metros like Pittsburgh to peel off younger adults, in much the same way that higher housing prices in California helped spark migration to the Pacific Northwest, Colorado, and so on.

But on a completely random aside--housing remains relatively cheap in the Texas cities too, but their attraction for millenials appears to be dropping rapidly. They do not necessarily need to panic yet--they still rank relatively high--but Texas economic growth is extremely dependent on high rates of in-migration, so they should probably be looking carefully at this trend and trying to figure out how to halt or reverse it. Same deal with the North Carolina metros, Atlanta, and other metros in the Deep South--in fact Atlanta dropped so low it is barely above Pittsburgh in the post-recession period. If continued that would be a terrible state of affairs for Atlanta.

[DKNewYork]

It has been great reading the posts from this week, which have contained lots of positive news. Hope it continues.

I share the disappointment that the Penn Lincoln Hotel will not be saved. I can confirm that it is badly deteriorated---the hotel is in much worse condition than the Crescent was at the time of its renovation, which is saying a lot given that the roof of the Crescent had mostly collapsed into the basement by that time. That said, Penn Lincoln could have been restored but at a huge cost, which no one can afford. Landmarks tried for years (and at great expense) to find parties who could partner with the owner, a local religious group. The situation has become pressing because the brickwork is failing. The building's condition is too dangerous to allow the hotel to continue to be warehoused waiting for the neighborhood to improve enough to justify the financials.

PHLF will save artifacts from the hotel and, more importantly, file for creation of a National Register district for the surrounding commercial area, which will insure that many of the other significant buildings will be preserved. The owner of the hotel will be bound to adhere to PHLF's guidelines about the scale and look of the new development.

The Penn Lincoln situation highlights an astounding statistic I learned from the National Trust: About two-thirds of the country's historic buildings are located in poor neighborhoods. This only adds to the challenge of historic preservation efforts. It is, unfortunately, not enough to simply want to save the building. The numbers have to work and in poorer neighborhoods that is much more difficult. Were the Penn Lincoln located in a neighborhood not as down on its luck as Wilkinsburg, we would probably not be discussing it.

To whomever mentioned the photos of the Crescent: I toured the building at the start of construction and then later after the work was complete. The apartments are impressive, particularly given the decrepit condition of the building at the start. It was a shell, not a building.

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Local officials, including Peduto, are trying to woo a Slovenian LED company that is looking for a manufacturing location in the U.S.:

http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/5062930-74/grah-peduto-plant#axzz2kdCc8EWa

Most interesting to me was that they specifically looked at the ALMONO site in Hazelwood--it wouldn't be bad to jump start that project with a new occupied building at the same time the infrastructure phase is complete--and also the Crucible Steel building.

The Crucible Steel building has gone through a bunch of possible plans and last I knew they were actually thinking residential--personally, I'd prefer to see that happen, and this LED company go in the ALMONO site, but either would be fine.

Wow, I find stories like this quite interesting. Having bot oy my grand-paps nearly dying on oppoisite sides of the world (My dad's dad fighting the "battle of the bulge" (no relation to today's empidemic.
When The massive steel plants closed downed and 200,000+ core and ancialty jobs were lots, it has change the dempgraphics quite differently.

[Found5dollar]

I just drove down ellsworth ave and noticed a new mural! With a little bit of digging i found its page on PGHmurals.com.

http://pghmurals.com/Do-You-Remember-Margo-Lovelace.cfm

She has never had the notoriety or instant recognition among the public that other puppeteers like Jim Henson or Fred Rogers have known, yet she is a world class, international award winning, puppeteer that ran her own theater here in Pittsburgh for years.

The purpose of this mural was to introduce Margo Lovelace and her legacy to those of us who were unfamiliar with her, and to bring back the childhood memories for those who experienced her shows first hand.

Margo Lovelace Visser began her lifelong relationship with puppets in 1949. She traveled the world studying and acquiring a diverse collection of masks and puppets of every style. In 1957 she opened a studio in East Liberty, but it wasn't until 1964 that she converted a garage in a house on Ellsworth Ave into the Lovelace Marionette Theatre Company (LMT Co) – the country’s first privately owned puppet theater. Over the years the LMT Co not only entertained local children with both classic and original stories, but they also trained and apprenticed them through schools and workshops.

In the late 70’s they moved to the Carnegie Museum of Art theater. There was also a three week engagement at the Smithsonian. When she donated her collection to the Pittsburgh Children’s Museum in 1985, the 284 puppets represented 35 cultures.

[DBR96A]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Courtesy of Chris Briem, the chart in this article shows that there has been a net-inflow of "Millenials" into the Pittsburgh MSA during the post-recession period:

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/11/1...gton-after-abandoning-city-in-recession/

Notably the overall movement of Millenials nationwide is still low by historic standards for people of their age range, which is likely because the recession and slow recovery has depressed their ability to move. However, the fact that Pittsburgh is now ranking relatively well on a list like this (#20 among the top 51 metros for the post-recession period) with a positive trend suggests that it stands to benefit even more as the recovery continues and Millenial mobility (likely) increases. Given the observable trends in housing preference among Millenials, all this specifically bodes well for more urban, walkable, and transit-friendly locations, which in turn means we should likely expect new multi-unit developments in such areas to continue to find tenants with relative ease.

Edit: By the way, Washington and Baltimore, particularly Washington, are also net gainers in the post-recession period. However, otherwise the big Northeast Coast metros (Boston, Providence, Hartford, NYC, and Philly) are all net losers. Some of that is business as usual--in particular cities which are big immigration gateways often see regular domestic outmigration--but still, I think it remains true that high housing prices in the Northeast Coast, particularly in otherwise desirable urban core locations, create opportunities for much more affordable metros like Pittsburgh to peel off younger adults, in much the same way that higher housing prices in California helped spark migration to the Pacific Northwest, Colorado, and so on.

But on a completely random aside--housing remains relatively cheap in the Texas cities too, but their attraction for millenials appears to be dropping rapidly. They do not necessarily need to panic yet--they still rank relatively high--but Texas economic growth is extremely dependent on high rates of in-migration, so they should probably be looking carefully at this trend and trying to figure out how to halt or reverse it. Same deal with the North Carolina metros, Atlanta, and other metros in the Deep South--in fact Atlanta dropped so low it is barely above Pittsburgh in the post-recession period. If continued that would be a terrible state of affairs for Atlanta.

Raleigh also cratered, and none of Florida's four largest metropolitan areas have gained young people since 2010 (though it's essentially flat in Jacksonville). Still, for all the talk about how the Carolinas, Georgia and Florida are "booming" and "prosperous" and "people vote with their feet" and everything, they've begun to lose their shine with younger people lately.

"ZOMG YOUG PEOPLE IS FLEEEING IN DORVES FROM FLORDIA LOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11"

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Courtesy of Chris Briem, the chart in this article shows that there has been a net-inflow of "Millenials" into the Pittsburgh MSA during the post-recession period:

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/11/1...gton-after-abandoning-city-in-recession/

Notably the overall movement of Millenials nationwide is still low by historic standards for people of their age range, which is likely because the recession and slow recovery has depressed their ability to move. However, the fact that Pittsburgh is now ranking relatively well on a list like this (#20 among the top 51 metros for the post-recession period) with a positive trend suggests that it stands to benefit even more as the recovery continues and Millenial mobility (likely) increases. Given the observable trends in housing preference among Millenials, all this specifically bodes well for more urban, walkable, and transit-friendly locations, which in turn means we should likely expect new multi-unit developments in such areas to continue to find tenants with relative ease.

Edit: By the way, Washington and Baltimore, particularly Washington, are also net gainers in the post-recession period. However, otherwise the big Northeast Coast metros (Boston, Providence, Hartford, NYC, and Philly) are all net losers. Some of that is business as usual--in particular cities which are big immigration gateways often see regular domestic outmigration--but still, I think it remains true that high housing prices in the Northeast Coast, particularly in otherwise desirable urban core locations, create opportunities for much more affordable metros like Pittsburgh to peel off younger adults, in much the same way that higher housing prices in California helped spark migration to the Pacific Northwest, Colorado, and so on.

But on a completely random aside--housing remains relatively cheap in the Texas cities too, but their attraction for millenials appears to be dropping rapidly. They do not necessarily need to panic yet--they still rank relatively high--but Texas economic growth is extremely dependent on high rates of in-migration, so they should probably be looking carefully at this trend and trying to figure out how to halt or reverse it. Same deal with the North Carolina metros, Atlanta, and other metros in the Deep South--in fact Atlanta dropped so low it is barely above Pittsburgh in the post-recession period. If continued that would be a terrible state of affairs for Atlanta.

There seem to be a lot of Millennials moving here from Northeast Ohio.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

There seem to be a lot of Millennials moving here from Northeast Ohio.

Seems likely given general Pittsburgh migration patterns (we get a lot of migrants from nearby parts of Ohio as well as non-Pittsburgh MSA western PA).

[themaguffin]

FL is a different animal than the rest of the sun belt. As for Raleigh, that city will do well in the long run with young professionals as it is young and growing and has a massive student population to draw from.

DC will be strong as long as their are gov't related opportunities or indirect opportunities related to gov't... not to mention DC has done with tech industries.