PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by TBone7281

I haven't been that way in a long time, did they rename one of the streets to Walnut?

"Walnut on Highland" is the name of the complex starting with the Wallace Building on the corner of Centre and including the Highland Building.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by GeneW

Walnut Capital is the developer's name.

It's funny that they've developed into such a big name in local development, given their past history was basically a marginally higher end student rental company in the East End.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by eschaton

It's funny that they've developed into such a big name in local development, given their past history was basically a marginally higher end student rental company in the East End.

Interestingly, there was a whole bunch of failed projects involving the Highland Building before Walnut finally pulled it off. I wonder if their company history actually helped them specifically on that project.

[SkyPittsburgh]

There is a new Planning Commission Presentation Up:

-New temporary parking lot and site improvements in East Liberty near the recently converted former school at Baum, Commerce, and South Euclid.
-Updated language to the Urban Agriculture Zoning Language.
-Renovations at 2 PPG Place to add a restaurant.
-US Steel Headquarters Designs. If this was placed in another neighborhood, the park would be absolutely amazing. Too bad it's downtown.
-Skyline Terrace Phase 2 Demolition and new construction.

See more here

[Private Dick]

"The Penn at Walnut on Highland in East Liberty of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania of USA on Earth"

[JVC]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

That entrance is going to be at the corner of Penn and Highland. To see a historic example of another building like that, you'll just have to turn around.

Or go down the block.

that type of entrance works very well for a 100% commercial building

the penn building is an apartment building with ground floor retail
disguised as a 100% commercial building which is probably why residents will be forced to enter the building through the back door

[JVC]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

"The Penn at Walnut on Highland in East Liberty of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania of USA on Earth"

well played

[eschaton]

It's interesting to me that they are subdividing a small segment of the U.S. Steel block off in the rear. This suggests that the Penguins (or some other stakeholder) wants to allow for the option to shrink the green space in the rear of the property by roughly 50% if the market ends up being strong in the Lower Hill. Particularly because that parcel will lack the heavy landscaping on the other half of the green rear of the block.

Also, Skyline Terrace is turning out shockingly good. Much better than any mixed-income infill I've seen in the City. That said, I do find it a bit disappointing they're keeping to the historical vernacular so well but still using pretty substantial, suburban-style setbacks.

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by eschaton

It's interesting to me that they are subdividing a small segment of the U.S. Steel block off in the rear. This suggests that the Penguins (or some other stakeholder) wants to allow for the option to shrink the green space in the rear of the property by roughly 50% if the market ends up being strong in the Lower Hill. Particularly because that parcel will lack the heavy landscaping on the other half of the green rear of the block.

Also, Skyline Terrace is turning out shockingly good. Much better than any mixed-income infill I've seen in the City. That said, I do find it a bit disappointing they're keeping to the historical vernacular so well but still using pretty substantial, suburban-style setbacks.

God I hate giant setbacks. That seems to me to be one of the biggest differences between a real city and a new suburban office park city. Yet so much new development uses it. Is it that mandatory that no developers can overcome this obvious flaw?

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by JVC

that type of entrance works very well for a 100% commercial building
the penn building is an apartment building with ground floor retail

So we are back full circle having moved the goal posts around the field several times--you ARE arguing that upper floor apartments must get some sort of grand entrance of their own.

Anyway, as usual, there is no such rule.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by eschaton

It's interesting to me that they are subdividing a small segment of the U.S. Steel block off in the rear. This suggests that the Penguins (or some other stakeholder) wants to allow for the option to shrink the green space in the rear of the property by roughly 50% if the market ends up being strong in the Lower Hill. Particularly because that parcel will lack the heavy landscaping on the other half of the green rear of the block.

That is the only (purely relative) bright spot in all this. Because as it stands, this makes me want to puke--this is supposed to be a dense urban development!

[Austinlee]

^But how are local youths supposed to do sweet bmx wheelies as seen in the bottom right corner if there aren't tons of setbacks, green space and parking?

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by eschaton

That said, I do find it a bit disappointing they're keeping to the historical vernacular so well but still using pretty substantial, suburban-style setbacks.

Yep, although that makes it very Squirrel Hill-ish, and I can imagine it was an easier sell that way to those here who are very concerned about new housing in distressed neighborhoods being too dense/urban (a frustrating attitude to be sure).

[JVC]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

you ARE arguing that upper floor apartments must get some sort of grand entrance of their own.

correct - a building in an urban setting should have a main entrance that faces the street at the front of the building

i can only imagine the reaction daniel burnham would have received if the main entrance to his highland building had been placed in the alley on the side of the building - his colleagues would have committed him to a psychiatric facility

structures like the highland building are great in part because architects did follow rules of proper design they were taught in school

in the current epoch there are no rules which explains why urban disasters like lubetz's green condo building got built

[Private Dick]

Is this a bad joke?

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by JVC

correct - a building in an urban setting should have a main entrance that faces the street at the front of the building

Again, it does.

Your actual complaint is that the main entrance on the corner is a ground floor retail entrance rather than an upper floor apartment entrance, but of course it makes perfect sense for that to be a ground floor retail entrance.

The irony is you started all this complaining about context. Now that we have confirmed it is going to be just like the other historic corner buildings nearby, suddenly your argument is: "Forget context! It has upper floor apartments so should be completely different!"

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

Is this a bad joke?

Really, really bad.

Remember this?



That red line along Wylie in this block was supposed to be ground floor retail, with minimal setbacks.

HAHAHAHA, no, screw that. US STEEL, baby! Wooooooot!

Edit: In fact, that was the only block which was going to have street retail on both sides. Psyche!

Incidentally, the City could automatically reject this plan for failure to comply with the PLDP. But what the Marios want, the Marios get.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Austinlee

God I hate giant setbacks. That seems to me to be one of the biggest differences between a real city and a new suburban office park city. Yet so much new development uses it. Is it that mandatory that no developers can overcome this obvious flaw?

In Pittsburgh zoning code, the minimum setbacks are pretty much as follows for residential:

Very Low/Low/Moderate - 30
High - 15
Very High - 5

All apartments have 25 foot setbacks under zoning, except for those in very low density areas, which have 30 foot setbacks.

That said, Pittsburgh allows "contextual" setbacks, which allow a builder to use a lesser setback than the zoned area (including zero) which is either shared with the adjacent building or the average setback for the "area" as a whole. This is voluntary however - you can still have suburban-style setbacks if you want even in Lawrenceville or South Side.

I would suppose the issue with trying to re-institute zero setback in/around the Hill District today is so much of the original fabric has been destroyed there is little "contextual" left to measure against.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by eschaton

In Pittsburgh zoning code, the minimum setbacks are pretty much as follows for residential . . .
I would suppose the issue with trying to re-institute zero setback in/around the Hill District today is so much of the original fabric has been destroyed there is little "contextual" left to measure against.

Very fair points. However, I believe they could also have sought designation of this site as a Specially Planned (SP) district (you just need a minimum of 15 contiguous, commonly-owned acres, and I believe it is WAY bigger than that), in which case they could have sought approval of a PLDP with smaller setbacks.

Of course as we are seeing on the Lower Hill, none of that might matter in the long run anyway.

[Gilamonster]

Which office park is the new USX headquarters being built in? Oh wait......