PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[BrianTH]

The Fort Pitt hotel is back from the dead! There was a similar project, also from Forza, for that site some years ago now that ran into serious design critiques and general NIMBYism. It is a great spot for this sort of thing, so hopefully it gets done this time.

Edit: Old article:

http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/10308/1100514-28.stm?cmpid=newspanel3

[chiaroscuro]

Originally Posted by Austinlee

Sorry to offend, if I did. And thank you for the right to bitch.
Sometimes I tend to fantasize about this country being more like the great cities of Europe or even Japan. The suburban car culture gets to my head....

No worries. I enjoy reading your posts.

[photoLith]

I sure hope the skinny building looks damned good once completely restored, unlike those three "restored" cast iron buildings across the street from it. I dont think Ive ever seen an historic building thats cast iron that bright yellow. Im glad they restored them but that yellow color is absolutely horrendous. I dont think they would have looked like that in the 1870s or 80s.

[Found5dollar]

The late 1800's was the Victorian era in architecture. Bright color was all the rage. The gold, burgundy, and blue they painted the iron buildings is in perfect keeping whith the color scheme of the period they are trying to represent. Honestly, I cant think of many other combinations that would invoke it more...

[photoLith]

Yes I know that but yellow wasnt often used, I mean yellow is used but theres just something strange about the coloration of those restored buildings. Also, the buildings would have been distinguished and not all the same colour. I cant think of a single buildings from that era thats cast iron thats that color, be it NY, Galveston, or San Fran. Even if it was a color used during that time its still horrendous. I just have never seen it and I know a thing or two about architecture and history. Ive seen yellowish cast iron buildings in Soho but theres just something off with those buildings, like they didnt do it right.

[ladsnine]

The idea of Victorian "painted ladies", either houses or larger buildings, is just kind of something that someone started doing in the mid-20th century or so and then was picked up by others as looking nice and sort of evolved to people considering those to be "historically correct" colors. All the historic photos available of owners' buildings were black-and-white so aside from occasional narrative descriptions, no one ever really knew what color old houses had originally been. This isn't to say people had taste in the 19th century - an 1830s building I researched a few years ago was originally painted dark green with light green window frames, according to a narrative from that time - but the "olde" colors people often use now aren't necessarily right.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by ladsnine

The idea of Victorian "painted ladies", either houses or larger buildings, is just kind of something that someone started doing in the mid-20th century or so and then was picked up by others as looking nice and sort of evolved to people considering those to be "historically correct" colors. All the historic photos available of owners' buildings were black-and-white so aside from occasional narrative descriptions, no one ever really knew what color old houses had originally been. This isn't to say people had taste in the 19th century - an 1830s building I researched a few years ago was originally painted dark green with light green window frames, according to a narrative from that time - but the "olde" colors people often use now aren't necessarily right.

It's not as if these colors have vanished without a trace. Many buildings which have been painted several times have remnants of the old colors left, and even if these have faded/changed over time, we know enough about chemistry to backtrack.

In addition, it's not like the formulas to make these pigments totally vanished into the dustbin of history.

[GeneW]

Originally Posted by ladsnine

The idea of Victorian "painted ladies", either houses or larger buildings, is just kind of something that someone started doing in the mid-20th century or so and then was picked up by others as looking nice and sort of evolved to people considering those to be "historically correct" colors. All the historic photos available of owners' buildings were black-and-white so aside from occasional narrative descriptions, no one ever really knew what color old houses had originally been. This isn't to say people had taste in the 19th century - an 1830s building I researched a few years ago was originally painted dark green with light green window frames, according to a narrative from that time - but the "olde" colors people often use now aren't necessarily right.

The painted lady thing wasn't invented in the 20th century, it's just that the revivals in the 20th century did it wrong. Victorian houses were often and even mostly painted in complex three or four color schemes and paint companies catered to that trend with their colors and brochures. They just weren't painted those wild purples, yellows and blues that the '70s San Francisco houses were. Paint technology wasn't really good enough to create those bright colors yet.

Sherwin William's Victorian palette is quite good and you can see that they are all fairly muted colors.

[Steel City Scotty]

Does anyone know if the conditions of Warner Centre have improved in recent years? I was recently researching shopping opportunities in Pittsburgh and came across this old article.

I've driven by the "Warner" sign on Fifth Avenue, and I always thought it was an active theater, but apparently, it was mostly vacant and in pretty bad shape a few years ago.

Warner Centre stands as reminder that Downtown restoration is not complete
June 14, 2009 8:00 AM
By Mark Belko Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

On a wall in the food court at Downtown's Warner Centre, the cheese fries are still going for $2.75 and three large chicken tenders for $3.99.

But don't bother placing an order.

The signs hark back to better days for the one-time opera house and movie theater turned enclosed mall that has seen its share of hard luck over the years.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/business/bus...ion-is-not-complete/stories/200906140170

[BrianTH]

I don't mind the yellow per se, and I agree it is near enough to historically proper.

What actually bothers me about the way they painted those buildings is that to my eye they didn't make enough use of the secondary colors, which means lots of the cool details don't stand out from the background color. The eaves and support brackets are the one part that looks "right" to me, and I would have liked to see that same sort of approach throughout.

Big PHLF photo:

http://www.phlf.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/photo-15-e1380312399859.jpg

One of my own:



I understand there is a conceptual problem in that the buildings "share" the vertical pilasters. But why couldn't you, say, pick out some of the great details above and below the windows in the same way as with the eaves? That little bit of use of the secondary colors in the window frames and mullions isn't enough to stand out, and in fact those uses would likely stand out more if there was more use of the secondary colors nearby as well.

[SkyPittsburgh]

I drove past the Village Green site in Bloomfield today. They are already half-way through demolishing the building, and there was an excavator digging out dirt at quite a fast pace.

Aside, I think Peduto made an interesting comment in terms of the Historic Restoration of Pittsburgh.

Where we’re using government funds, where we’re expending taxpayer dollars, we’re expecting developers not to put into the trash heap the history of the city of Pittsburgh but polish it up and save it.

Promising to hear from the Mayor.

[gallacus]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

I don't mind the yellow per se, and I agree it is near enough to historically proper.

What actually bothers me about the way they painted those buildings is that to my eye they didn't make enough use of the secondary colors, which means lots of the cool details don't stand out from the background color. The eaves and support brackets are the one part that looks "right" to me, and I would have liked to see that same sort of approach throughout.

...

I understand there is a conceptual problem in that the buildings "share" the vertical pilasters. But why couldn't you, say, pick out some of the great details above and below the windows in the same way as with the eaves? That little bit of use of the secondary colors in the window frames and mullions isn't enough to stand out, and in fact those uses would likely stand out more if there was more use of the secondary colors nearby as well.

I have long thought that there is something that catches your eye on these buildings that's just not right. Every time I see it I think to myself "gee, I hope they're not leaving it like that." It just looks unfinished. Was there maybe an awning in that large flat section above the first floor? The doors are hideous as well. Oh well, at least they're still standing and 50 years from now someone else can come along and do it right.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by gallacus

Was there maybe an awning in that large flat section above the first floor?

I've thought the same thing, or maybe the sorts of signs that would project out from the building.

[BrianTH]

The AWC conservator wants to allow the developer to get started on due diligence and engineering, even as talks with the opponents are ongoing:

http://www.post-gazette.com/ae/2014/05/2...n-Center-Pittsburgh/stories/201405230183
http://triblive.com/news/adminpage/6165147-74/center-980-judge#axzz32ZRA5Sxw

[BrianTH]

Article on the Holiday Inn proposal:

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2...-be-headed-Downtown/stories/201405230173

[BrianTH]

The Oakland developer may have the same thought we discussed above:

http://triblive.com/business/headlines/6158763-74/apartments-oakland-properties#axzz32ZRA5Sxw

A developer purchased property for a project that could include apartments, retail stores and perhaps a hotel on a 1.5-acre block in South Oakland. . . . “Besides the 12 properties the developer has purchased, we are working with the city to acquire some city-owned properties,” said William Bannow of Point View Properties, who is assisting Kane and Dauer. Bannow said Oakland Gateway Ventures is considering one- and two-bedroom apartments for university students or medical personnel from nearby hospitals. A hotel could be part of the mix, he said.

I'm not sure you could fit both a hotel and apartments within just the current footprint, and the idea of acquiring some "some city-owned properties" would seem to be referring to the park.

[Jonboy1983]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Article on the Holiday Inn proposal:

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2...-be-headed-Downtown/stories/201405230173

I have a couple of issues with the Holiday Inn. Is 8 stories high enough? And at 99 rooms, I think it could go a little larger and offer at least 120 or so rooms. It's in Downtown right near Grant and Ft. Pitt Blvd. I'd like to see this thing rise about 10 to perhaps 12 floors. I don't think a building that tall would look too terribly out of place. Not to mention, just a couple of blocks away, you have One Oxford Centre and the Grant Building.

Also, is that I-376 on-ramp from Grant really necessary? It kinda ruins the city landscape there. If they remove that ramp and redirect traffic another 2 block s to access I-376 from Wood, they could expand the little parklet there, therefore enhancing not only the hotel there, but the neighborhood in general.

I love how the one person replied saying they don't necessarily like this idea, saying the existing neighborhood is "placid," and has a "safe feel" to it. You know, the idea here is to have a nice, walkable, cohesive downtown. Downtown has a huge lack of hotel rooms, and I see some room for improvement for the Firstside neighborhood...

Originally Posted by BrianTH

The AWC conservator wants to allow the developer to get started on due diligence and engineering, even as talks with the opponents are ongoing:

http://www.post-gazette.com/ae/2014/05/2...n-Center-Pittsburgh/stories/201405230183
http://triblive.com/news/adminpage/6165147-74/center-980-judge#axzz32ZRA5Sxw

I like Peduto, but I think he and Fitz are wrong here. So somebody wants to build a hotel on top of the AWC. I think if anything that could enhance the use of the AWC. Having hotel rooms right on top of the property would likely boost the likleyhood of bringing more African American themed conferences, seminars, or conventions to not just the AWC, but also to the Convention Center which could use the AWC as auxiliary space...

I see it being a huge win-win-win. Good for the AWC, good for the hotel situation Downtown, good for the Convention Center...

[themaguffin]

While it would be nice if the hotel were a little taller, the proposed Holiday Inn looks nice in the proposal.

[Gilamonster]

An 8 story hotel with 9 parking spaces. I don't think that's good for business. People are going to be upset when they realize they have to park their car in a private lot or public garage for $15+ per day.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by themaguffin

While it would be nice if the hotel were a little taller, the proposed Holiday Inn looks nice in the proposal.

That's my thought as well. I certainly wouldn't mind if it were a few stories taller, but at the end of the day it is a pretty small lot, and they have run into NIMBY problems before, so if something decent can get done this time I am all for it.