PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[Jonboy1983]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Here they are actually planning to have it be combined with a park-and-ride lot for the T Station, so apparently they are quite confident there will be excess parking. Looking at the plan in comparison to satellite views of the site, it appears that is possible through a combination of using the school's former parking lots and also carving out more spaces from the school's former ball fields.

All of which would be considerably less than ideal if this was a station in an area where much denser development could be expected. But that is not really the case for this station at this time, and in fact it looks like there are plenty more surface lots in the area that could be developed before you would ever have to come back to this particular site.

You know, you're right about that. Pieces of land that come to mind are situated around the Denise St. Station. Directly west of that is either wide open land or run-down old industrial land in dire need of some attention. I would actually love to see something go here.

This is one of many areas in which are balkanized local government structure really hurts us.

No kidding!

Ultimately a comprehensive boulevard plan is what we need not only to unlock the development potential along those routes themselves, but also to bring serious reinvestment to the existing Mon Valley towns that could use them to access the core area. But then localities like Baldwin can act as a wall in the way of doing any such thing.

Again, I don't want to reawaken dormant debates, but to be fair, this is part of why bad road projects in greenfield areas get selected over good road projects within the current developed footprint: all sorts of NIMBYism, turf wars, and so on can make it very hard to put together the latter, so the former don't face much competition.

Looking further at Baldwin Borough and the PA 51 corridor as a whole from Pittsburgh down through Jefferson Hills and beyond, E.D. South wants to transform this whole corridor into more of a complete street. Let's say this actually does happen in the municipalities that want this. With Baldwin saying "absolutely not" to this idea, this will more or less transform the half-mile stretch of road into a bottleneck for travelers headed in both directions. When it comes to the borough's land use and zoning, this is the only commercial space in the entire borough. If you get traffic screwed up enough, it could wind up hurting whatever businesses are located there, and they could decide to locate elsewhere. Given that the current layout of the highway likely will not be changing anytime soon, I don't think the borough is going to find too many businesses to want to set up shop along that road. Guess who the tax burden is going to fall on...

You want to know what's messed up? My father and I actually personally know someone on council, and he's one of the ones vehemently opposed to this idea...

edit: This is the link to the blog post regarding this idea.
http://urbandesigneggshell.blogspot.com/2013/05/my-vision-for-baldwin-borough.html

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by DKNewYork

But one would assume that Baltimore & Ohio RR actually made it to Ohio, right? Maybe there was a split somewhere east of Pittsburgh and the Ohio-bound B&O traffic took the route that passed south of Pittsburgh? Or the Ohio-bound B&O traveled through Pittsburgh but on the track of another railroad? I'm just guessing here.

So early on, when they first acquired the Pittsburgh & Connellsville, there was just a branch terminating in Pittsburgh, with a junction in Cumberland. The southern route of the B&O continued on from Cumberland to Wheeling and into Ohio.

Pittsburgh eventually got its own B&O connection to Wheeling via Washington, PA--I believe that is the line that crosses the Mon east of the Glenwood Bridge and goes down through Homestead, Hays, and so on.

Finally, Pittsburgh also got its own B&O connection to Ohio via Youngstown, New Castle, etc. That went from Allegheny, along the ROW of the Pittsburgh & Western. It also continued up the Allegheny, and it used the Pittsburgh Junction Railroad to cross over Herr's Island, go down through the Neville tunnel, and connect to the B&O line running along the Mon (around Greenfield Avenue).

Anyway, I wonder if there were sometimes B&O passengers who transferred from the Downtown terminus of the B&O over to the station in Allegheny for continued service up into Ohio. That would make sense since there was not a very direct rail connection between those two points of their system (going through Neville would be very roundabout).

[Jonboy1983]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

So early on, when they first acquired the Pittsburgh & Connellsville, there was just a branch terminating in Pittsburgh, with a junction in Cumberland. The southern route of the B&O continued on from Cumberland to Wheeling and into Ohio.

Pittsburgh eventually got its own B&O connection to Wheeling via Washington, PA--I believe that is the line that crosses the Mon east of the Glenwood Bridge and goes down through Homestead, Hays, and so on.

Finally, Pittsburgh also got its own B&O connection to Ohio via Youngstown, New Castle, etc. That went from Allegheny, along the ROW of the Pittsburgh & Western. It also continued up the Allegheny, and it used the Pittsburgh Junction Railroad to cross over Herr's Island, go down through the Neville tunnel, and connect to the B&O line running along the Mon (around Greenfield Avenue).

Anyway, I wonder if there were sometimes B&O passengers who transferred from the Downtown terminus of the B&O over to the station in Allegheny for continued service up into Ohio. That would make sense since there was not a very direct rail connection between those two points of their system (going through Neville would be very roundabout).

Wow... Railroads were confusing as heck!!

[chucka]

Some good news!

http://www.post-gazette.com/business/201...-of-South-Side-deal/stories/201401180041

Miller's Ale House chain pulls out of South Side deal
January 17, 2014 11:18 PM
By Mark Belko / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

First Toby Keith, now Miller's Ale House. A prime piece of riverfront real estate on the South Side can't seem to keep a tenant.

The Florida-based Miller's Ale House chain has backed out of a deal to open a 9,000-square-foot full-service restaurant on half an acre of land next to Hofbrauhaus at the SouthSide Works complex.

...

Twice bitten by restaurants, Soffer now is re-evaluating the type of development it wants to see on the parcel, which overlooks the Monongahela River, said Thomas M. Despres, chief financial officer.

One possibility, he said, is an office building with a first-floor restaurant.

"It's wide open at this point," Mr. Despres said. "At this point, since we've been through Toby Keith and Miller's, we're looking at something more substantial at the site."

[GeneW]

Meanwhile, the North Shore is still getting a Toby Keith's.

[BrianTH]

It is very frustrating to watch the South Side Works evolve into something a lot more appropriate than the original plan, while the Steeler/Continental approach to the North Shore is, if anything, getting worse.

[Jonboy1983]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

It is very frustrating to watch the South Side Works evolve into something a lot more appropriate than the original plan, while the Steeler/Continental approach to the North Shore is, if anything, getting worse.

In that sense, the city is essentially cutting off its nose to spite its face. Let's see, both are prime river-front properties. Yet, on one they actually want to have more appropriate uses for the land, while the other location, which is closer to Downtown, well, gets that...

[BrianTH]

Brief article about the proposed parklet in the Cultural District:

http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/5437702-74/park-penn-avenue#axzz2qwImE6lY

The trust wants to turn a grassy corner it owns at Eighth and Penn avenues into a parklet by paving it and installing metal benches, a water fountain, a bottle filler for water and carbonated water, and landscaping along Penn that would end at a parking garage. The estimated $250,000 project would include a section for parking bicycles.

[Captain Crash]

Pretty cool round-up of some projects that never made it off the drawing board in Pittsburgh, some I've never seen. Glad that monument at the point never got off the ground but I sure wish that Arc was built!

The old Strip plans are interesting in light of what's going on there now.

http://www.pittsburghmagazine.com/Best-o...uld-Have-Been-Part-Star-Wars-Part-Paris/

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Captain Crash

Pretty cool round-up of some projects that never made it off the drawing board in Pittsburgh, some I've never seen. Glad that monument at the point never got off the ground but I sure wish that Arc was built! The old Strip plans are interesting in light of what's going on there now.

Interesting article!

The plans for the Strip and Lower Hill sucked. We can do better (although whether we will is a different question).

The bridge, Pitt monument, and Arc are all neat in the way that monumental ornamentation from that era is almost always neat.

Grant Plaza would have had right around the same square footage as One Oxford Centre. In isolation, I like the look of Grant Plaza a bit better, but One Oxford Centre works well as part of the Downtown Pittsburgh mix because it is such a pure expression of the 1980s aesthetic.

Edit: Speaking of cancelled projects, here is Two Oxford Centre:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=11...AAIBAJ&sjid=m20DAAAAIBAJ&pg=2125,6643867

[GeneW]

Originally Posted by Captain Crash

Pretty cool round-up of some projects that never made it off the drawing board in Pittsburgh, some I've never seen. Glad that monument at the point never got off the ground but I sure wish that Arc was built!

The old Strip plans are interesting in light of what's going on there now.

http://www.pittsburghmagazine.com/Best-o...uld-Have-Been-Part-Star-Wars-Part-Paris/

Thank the gods that those Le Corbusier-ish plans for The Hill and The Strip never happened and if there's any take-away from the urban mistakes of the 20th century, it's never to build projects like those again.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Brief article about the proposed parklet in the Cultural District:

http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/5437702-74/park-penn-avenue#axzz2qwImE6lY

Pretty bad idea, IMHO, considering two corners of Penn and 7th (e.g., a block away) are already parklets.

I mean, it's a step up from the ugly parking lot currently, but the Cultural Trust has been accused of land-banking in the past, and this plan seems to continue that pattern.

[BrianTH]

I kinda like all the parklets in the Cultural District with the different art installations.

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Pretty bad idea, IMHO, considering two corners of Penn and 7th (e.g., a block away) are already parklets.

I mean, it's a step up from the ugly parking lot currently, but the Cultural Trust has been accused of land-banking in the past, and this plan seems to continue that pattern.

Agreed.

[Johnland]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Interesting article!

The plans for the Strip and Lower Hill sucked. We can do better (although whether we will is a different question).

The bridge, Pitt monument, and Arc are all neat in the way that monumental ornamentation from that era is almost always neat.

Grant Plaza would have had right around the same square footage as One Oxford Centre. In isolation, I like the look of Grant Plaza a bit better, but One Oxford Centre works well as part of the Downtown Pittsburgh mix because it is such a pure expression of the 1980s aesthetic.

Edit: Speaking of cancelled projects, here is Two Oxford Centre:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=11...AAIBAJ&sjid=m20DAAAAIBAJ&pg=2125,6643867

I think it's actually good that the second Oxford Tower was never built. I love the one that stands today because, as you point out Brian, it is pure 80's exuberance. Much as I like it, I think two towers would've been mundane somehow.

Also was amused at the little business bit about the Dow reaching a new 'high' of 1209! Of course, that was a 1983 article.

[Jonboy1983]

^^^ The Cultural District is all about art, so why not have a parklet at this location?

Also, I love that bridge design, and I'm trying to figure out just where precisely it was to go! Regarding Grant Plaza, that architecture looks so much like Citigroup Building in Manhattan. If that guy isn't sure about buildings on narrow stilts, more or less, then I guess that's one prominent highrise he's never heard of! It's built the way it's built for a reason.

[Steel City Scotty]

Just out of curiosity...for the people who don't like the construction of buildings like Toby Keith's restaurant on the North Shore or a Miller's Ale House at Southside Works, could you explain why these projects classify as "poor development?"

I'm not saying I disagree with you. I'm just relatively new to the whole idea of proper placement of projects and wasn't sure what the issue was.

Do you think those restaurants are fine but shouldn't be taking up valuable riverfront property? Do you just not like the idea of chain restaurants anywhere within the city? Is office space more important? Or housing?

I can certainly see why people don't like the idea of the former Saks Fifth Avenue being turned into nothing more than a parking garage, but I feel like restaurants with a national (or regional) following would help generate revenue and bring lots of people to the area.

But, my background is in public relations, and I've worked for a tourism bureau for the past three years. It was only recently that I made a career switch and became my hometown's director of economic development.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

I kinda like all the parklets in the Cultural District with the different art installations.

They're about as good as you can make big gaps in the street wall look. But that's still what they are.

Really though, the overall agenda of the Pittsburgh Cultural Trust needs to be taken into account here. They've sat on a huge percentage of the land between Penn, Fort Duquense, 7th, and 9th for years. They walked out of a major development deal for the area and breached a contract. They've maintained this area as one of the largest expanses of surface lots downtown. Hell, the parcel in question still had a building on it back in 2011. It wasn't great, but it could have been reskinned, and was a hell of a better use than the surface parking lot there now.

Call me cynical, but I see this as basically a way to placate people downtown who haven't been happy about the role the Cultural Trust has played. Stick another parklet in front, and maybe they'll forget there is a giant surface lot there, and that a nonprofit is allowed to continually gobble up valuable downtown property and use it for nonproductive reasons.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Steel City Scotty

Just out of curiosity...for the people who don't like the construction of buildings like Toby Keith's restaurant on the North Shore or a Miller's Ale House at Southside Works, could you explain why these projects classify as "poor development?"

You'll likely get different answers from different people. Personally, I don't care about whether there is a Toby Keith's in locations like that. What I don't like is using prime land for a standalone restaurant, or only a three-story building (in the case of the North Shore). But if there was a 10+ story mixed-use building with a Toby Keith's on the ground floor, that would be fine with me.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by eschaton

They're about as good as you can make big gaps in the street wall look. But that's still what they are.

Eh, I don't think the street wall is the only acceptable urban/walkable form. In fact well-done parklets, pocket parks, POPOs and so on are common in top walkable cities like Paris, Barcelona, NYC, San Francisco, etc.

Call me cynical, but I see this as basically a way to placate people downtown who haven't been happy about the role the Cultural Trust has played. Stick another parklet in front, and maybe they'll forget there is a giant surface lot there, and that a nonprofit is allowed to continually gobble up valuable downtown property and use it for nonproductive reasons.

I agree with you about how badly the Cultural Trust has bungled development of this area, but it seems implausible to me that anyone knowledgeable and concerned about those issues is going to change their mind because of this parklet. Heck, the design won't really do anything to obscure the undeveloped nature of the rest of the block, and if anything will likely give more people an opportunity to pause and contemplate that problem.