PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[BrianTH]

Oxford is looking at doing a 5-story office building in the PTC:

http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/bl.../02/oxford-plans-office-building-at.html

1.51 acres sounds like a reference to the 2 West Parcel 1:

http://www.ura.org/developers/availableProperties/Hazelwood-PTC.pdf

Edit: Yep, Item 8.b:

http://apps.pittsburghpa.gov/ura-files/2-11-14-board_agenda.pdf

http://goo.gl/maps/JdTOa

[Wave]

#2. Whiskey Barrel Flats was seeking financing & exploring pre-sales as of last fall

#6. Poli: Action Housing is building on the Poli site only and that project is slowly moving forward. The former Sq. Hill Theater building and the smaller corner commercial building on the corner of Forward & Murray are currently for sale but Action Housing appears to be focused on the Poli development location only and not those other parcels at this time.

Originally Posted by Austinlee

Hey loyal Pgh forumers!

I have painstakingly collected another 120+ unique renderings and photos and drawings of other major city developments, excluding individual house restorations.

I have a couple questions about a couple mid sized developments that I am unsure of the current status before I post them.

What's the status of:

1. Odeon - East Lib? Moving forward?
2. Whiskey Barrel Flats (?) on West Carson St between Station Square and the SS flats? (Paging forumer Topher who was working on that project)
3. Hotel Indigo?
4. Vici on Mt Washington. Rendering looks nice but it's been stalled for 7 years. Prime location though.
5. The Pinnacle (or whatever it's called) highrise on Mt Wash on site of the now demoed restaurant.
6. Poli restaurant Squirrel Hill. Is there any multi story mixed use still planned or canned for that site?
7. Garden Theatre Block - Is ANYTHING happening there?? And renders?

Any other projects that have fallen by the way side??

Gracious muchachos!

[markson33]

The Indigo hotel is scheduled to be completed in June, although given the weather I would not be surprised at all if that slid by a month or two.

[BrianTH]

More details on the possible Oxford project in the PTC:

http://www.post-gazette.com/business/201...building-in-Oakland/stories/201402120043

Unfortunately, apparently it may be as short as three stories.

[SkyPittsburgh]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

More details on the possible Oxford project in the PTC:

http://www.post-gazette.com/business/201...building-in-Oakland/stories/201402120043

Unfortunately, apparently it may be as short as three stories.

Given how valuable that land is, and how low vacancy rates in Oakland are, I would assume they would build as tall as possible.

[AaronPGH]

Originally Posted by SkyPittsburgh

Given how valuable that land is, and how low vacancy rates in Oakland are, I would assume they would build as tall as possible.

One thing that local developers never have an abundance of is ambition.

[BrianTH]

I'd hope so too, but you never know what pre-leasing requirements and such they might have. The PTC is also its own little animal in many ways--I would assume demand there is tracking the greater Downtown and Oakland markets, but I don't really know.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by wpipkins2

The City Center DC development is massive at street level. The site is adjacent to China Town and the bustling Verizon Center district. If the lower hill is built out with similar density, Im OK with that. A new tower or two would be awesome though.

CityCenterDC is rightly considered a "world-class" urban development -- every aspect of it. It would be incredible to have something similar on the Civic Arena site in Pittsburgh. I don't think it's realistic that Pittsburgh could mirror this development exactly, but it could definitely use it as a close model.

And it will have 20% of its apartments designated as "affordable" units... "The Apartments at CityCenter is a 458 unit apartment community, located at 825 and 875 Tenth Street, NW in CityCenterDC. By agreement with the District of Columbia, 46 units will be reserved for individuals and families earning 60% or less of the area median income for the DC/MD/VA Metropolitan Statistical Area and 46 units will be reserved for individuals and families earning 80% or less of the area median income".

While I don't think it is totally necessary to do so in Pittsburgh's case with the Civic Arena site development due to the abundance of affordable and subsidized housing options in the immediate area, inclusion of affordable residential units in the heart of DC is refreshing and encouraging (especially for a project of this scale and stature).

And aside from the trees on the rooftops, I like everything about the development.











http://www.citycenterdc.com/overview

[East Edge]

Originally Posted by George Woods

Windows at PNC already:

It not green glass!! Yay!!!

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by AaronPGH

One thing that local developers never have an abundance of is ambition.

What are you talking about Aaron?!?

Continental RE heard our prayers and made that 2nd story building on the north shore into a a 3 story SUPERTALL.

[East Edge]

love that Old Stone Tavern in the West End Photo Lith. I hope it comes to fruition. I always thought it would be a cool project to renovate and bring back to its historical look. Any estimates on the cost to renovate? Any interested developers? Do they have parking?

[Don't Be That Guy]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

CityCenterDC is rightly considered a "world-class" urban development -- every aspect of it. It would be incredible to have something similar on the Civic Arena site in Pittsburgh. I don't think it's realistic that Pittsburgh could mirror this development exactly, but it could definitely use it as a close model.

And it will have 20% of its apartments designated as "affordable" units... "The Apartments at CityCenter is a 458 unit apartment community, located at 825 and 875 Tenth Street, NW in CityCenterDC. By agreement with the District of Columbia, 46 units will be reserved for individuals and families earning 60% or less of the area median income for the DC/MD/VA Metropolitan Statistical Area and 46 units will be reserved for individuals and families earning 80% or less of the area median income".

While I don't think it is totally necessary to do so in Pittsburgh's case with the Civic Arena site development due to the abundance of affordable and subsidized housing options in the immediate area, inclusion of affordable residential units in the heart of DC is refreshing and encouraging (especially for a project of this scale and stature).

And aside from the trees on the rooftops, I like everything about the development.

One thing that affordable housing advocates and developers typically don't put out there to the public is that setting aside affordable units are typically done through direct subsidy of taxpayer money, low income housing tax credits, or inflated rents on the market side to cover the difference. Usually it's a combination of all three. A 2x4 doesn't cost more in DC than it does in Pittsburgh, and tax credits will usually only cover half of the construction costs of an affordable housing unit in a mixed-income development. So even after adjusted for land costs putting in a large number of affordable units is difficult to do outside of markets where a developer can demand very high rents. Studios at CityCenter are starting at $2,100, which is unheard of in Pittsburgh.

Not to say that there shouldn't be a goal of inclusiveness of all income levels for new developments in Pittsburgh, but residents need to keep in mind that the money to build them has to come from somewhere.

And green-roofs are already becoming passe. Anything beyond the smaller tray systems are expensive to install, expensive to maintain, and a downright nightmare if a root punctures your roof membrane. I'd be surprised if CityCenter ends up with trees on the roofs.

[themaguffin]

I like the DC development, but not for the arena site. I see fewer buildings, but the ones closest to downtown would be taller... I think something of those size would make sense for the large parking lot to the east of the actual arena lot though....

[DKNewYork]

Originally Posted by Don't Be That Guy

One thing that affordable housing advocates and developers typically don't put out there to the public is that setting aside affordable units are typically done through direct subsidy of taxpayer money, low income housing tax credits, or inflated rents on the market side to cover the difference.

I realize that building bigger is not a natural inclination of Pittsburgh developers, but it seems to me that building more units and then designating some as affordable should work. I've liked the idea since Brian floated it as a solution to the disagreement between the Penguins and the Hill District housing advocates. This approach appears to be common with many mixed-income developments done here in New York City. A property zoned for 20 stories will instead allow 30 stories in return for a certain number of affordable units. To my knowledge, those NYC deals do not involve any direct public dollars. Maybe this approach only works in more established urban residential neighborhoods, where demand is more reliable... Granted, more units involves higher construction expense. But in return there are the same (or more) market rate units producing rent, more tenants patronizing the retail space in the development, etc. Should work, even in Pittsburgh.

Studios at CityCenter are starting at $2,100, which is unheard of in Pittsburgh.

Just curious: What would be the rent of a studio or one bedroom downtown at RiverVue or The Pennsylvanian?

Not to say that there shouldn't be a goal of inclusiveness of all income levels for new developments in Pittsburgh, but residents need to keep in mind that the money to build them has to come from somewhere.

Agreed.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Don't Be That Guy

Not to say that there shouldn't be a goal of inclusiveness of all income levels for new developments in Pittsburgh, but residents need to keep in mind that the money to build them has to come from somewhere.

Not to keep beating the same drum, but this is again part of why I think the solution is to just increase the number of units in the plan, so the percentage is what the Penguins want but the actual number of affordable units is what affordable housing advocates want. That approach means you also get more market-rate units to cross-subsidize the additional affordable units. And in fact with it likely being the case that the marginal cost per additional unit is fairly low, moving in this direction should actually help decrease the average cross-subsidy component of rent for each market-rate unit.

The big assumption here is that you could in fact market more units without significant rent erosion. But on that point, it is worth keeping in mind that the Penguins' residential plan for the site dates way back to the mid-2000s. Since then, trends have been extremely positive for new residential units in good locations, and in fact various other developers have switched to offering more residential units in their plans (as in BKSQ 2.0, Eastside III, and so on).

So I think it is a VERY good bet that the numbers can work, or at least work a lot better, with this strategy.

Edit: Hah, I have DKNY now doing my work for me!

[Topher51]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

And it will have 20% of its apartments designated as "affordable" units... "The Apartments at CityCenter is a 458 unit apartment community, located at 825 and 875 Tenth Street, NW in CityCenterDC. By agreement with the District of Columbia, 46 units will be reserved for individuals and families earning 60% or less of the area median income for the DC/MD/VA Metropolitan Statistical Area and 46 units will be reserved for individuals and families earning 80% or less of the area median income".

The median household income in metro DC in 2011 was $88,491.

http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/district-of-columbia/washington/

60% of the median income in metro DC is $53,095, which is $2,000 more than the national mediam income. To call those units "affordable housing" is laughable.

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Oxford is looking at doing a 5-story office building in the PTC:

http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/bl.../02/oxford-plans-office-building-at.html

1.51 acres sounds like a reference to the 2 West Parcel 1:

http://www.ura.org/developers/availableProperties/Hazelwood-PTC.pdf

Edit: Yep, Item 8.b:

http://apps.pittsburghpa.gov/ura-files/2-11-14-board_agenda.pdf

http://goo.gl/maps/JdTOa

I'm very happy. I have been excited for years to see the full, 100% built-out version of the Pitt Tech Center. I know I am often in the majority here, but I love modern "suburban style" corporate and research buildings. I just do. It's so cool that there are already several very unique buildings located there and when I heard a year or two back that they have plans to build approx. 1 million more sq ft of space, I was so pumped.

[Austinlee]

Thank you guys who gave me info on those projects I asked about. In the next day or two I will preview all the latest renderings and info that I will then upload to page 1 of the thread to really make it robust with not just the biggest and tallest projects but the many smaller projects that are transforming the city one block at a time.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by Don't Be That Guy

One thing that affordable housing advocates and developers typically don't put out there to the public is that setting aside affordable units are typically done through direct subsidy of taxpayer money, low income housing tax credits, or inflated rents on the market side to cover the difference. Usually it's a combination of all three. A 2x4 doesn't cost more in DC than it does in Pittsburgh, and tax credits will usually only cover half of the construction costs of an affordable housing unit in a mixed-income development. So even after adjusted for land costs putting in a large number of affordable units is difficult to do outside of markets where a developer can demand very high rents. Studios at CityCenter are starting at $2,100, which is unheard of in Pittsburgh.

Not to say that there shouldn't be a goal of inclusiveness of all income levels for new developments in Pittsburgh, but residents need to keep in mind that the money to build them has to come from somewhere.

And green-roofs are already becoming passe. Anything beyond the smaller tray systems are expensive to install, expensive to maintain, and a downright nightmare if a root punctures your roof membrane. I'd be surprised if CityCenter ends up with trees on the roofs.

One of the factors in why I oppose including a low-income housing component on the Civic Arena site.

I would hardly say that green roofs are becoming passe. To the contrary, they are becoming more sought after than ever, and a number of very large corporations are getting in on the act, including Firestone.

Planting actual trees on roofs is just plain stupid. People like the looks of them on rooftops on renderings, and architects put them in to look "green" and "sustainable", but they are highly impractical and rarely come to fruition. First and foremost being that trees do very poorly on roofs... even at only ten stories up, unless they are heavily protected by surrounding taller buildings... and they still rarely thrive. Trees were not meant to grow by their lonesome at high altitudes, particularly in cities where there exist extremes of temperature and moisture and very high wind gusts -- architects rarely understand evapotranspiration. Tree species are adapted to very specific habitats... and none of those habitats include the tops of buildings. If a tree is present high on a roof, chances are it's not looking too healthy and green. There's a good reason why green roofs are planted with grasses, herbs, sedums, and mosses which are very hearty and thrive in extreme conditions.

[Austinlee]

And Private Dick, the DC City Center looks pretty sweet. A hasty google search though revealed that it costs around 1 billion. So yeahhhh, maybe we could trade the Shell Cracker plant for that development.