PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[Brentsters]

Obviously he reads the board and has heard our calls...

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by themaguffin

Interesting.

"It's just the understanding that development for development's sake is not our goal any longer. But quality development that will enhance and bring with it further quality development is now the model," the mayor said.

As I noted in comments over there, it doesn't much matter what he says if in practice he keeps supporting crappy projects because the local people behind the project are well-connected.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

However, the West Busway goes to Carnegie (via Sheraden, Ingram, and Crafton). So without necessarily trying to pin down Carnegie itself in particular, I think it plausibly represents the terminus of the "west" development corridor in some sense.

Edit: By the way, some people may not find this as mind-blowing as me, but I find it at least remarkable that the arc I noted--McKees Rocks/Ingram/Crafton/Carnegie--is more or less equivalent in terms of distance from Downtown as the Lawrenceville/Bloomfield/Shadyside/Squirrel Hill/Greenfied/Hazelwood arc.

True. I was talking more about historical association/connection with the South Hills in an economic/social/cultural sense... largely due to immigrant groups and ethnic/religious kinship... all which the surrounding topography caused by Chartiers Creek and its tribs strongly influenced.

But I agree with your point about Carnegie being the terminus of a dense western development corridor, and with further development, I would hope that the result is greater connectivity between south and west.


On your EDIT... that's interesting. I guess the whole river crossing and associated hills make it seem like it's so much further away.

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

As I noted in comments over there, it doesn't much matter what he says if in practice he keeps supporting crappy projects because the local people behind the project are well-connected.

US Steel, Point Park Playhouse...

[themaguffin]

He may not have that much control on projects in the works for sometime. Maybe he does. I'm not trying to defend any possible poor judgement on his part, but wondering.

[Muckk]

Originally Posted by TBone7281

New bike lanes on Roberto Clemente Bridge turned out pretty nice.

You forgot to mention the best part!





Wait... did I snag this image from this very forum? I'm too lazy to go back and look. If so, kudos to the initial poster.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by themaguffin

He may not have that much control on projects in the works for sometime. Maybe he does. I'm not trying to defend any possible poor judgement on his part, but wondering.

The Playhouse is vulnerable to a historic designation. The US Steel project requires an amendment to the PLDP for the Lower Hill (meaning it violates the current PLDP). If Peduto threatened to support historic designation and oppose amending the PLDP respectively, it would very likely go a long way to at least forcing major modifications to those projects.

A good example, in fact, is The Penn at Walnut on Highland. The Peduto Administration favored doing something more to save some of the historic facades, and Walnut negotiated a new design. Other examples include negotiating a buy out of Buncher's Produce Terminal option so it could be re-bid, and (unfortunately) killing the hotel developer's bid to buy the August Wilson Center. There are so many regulatory hoops these projects need to go through that the Mayor does in fact typically have a lot of leverage, if he wants to use it.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Muckk

If so, kudos to the initial poster.

I posted it here, but I think I got it from Bike PGH. So the real credit goes to whoever actually took it.

[TBone7281]

Originally Posted by Muckk

You forgot to mention the best part!





Wait... did I snag this image from this very forum? I'm too lazy to go back and look. If so, kudos to the initial poster.

I had it in the back of my mind when I was there, but I didn't see it. I had sort of assumed it would be on both sides of the bridge, but maybe not.

[ks2006]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

seems a bit diminutive compared to the new 27,000 sq ft downtown grocer in Cleveland

http://www.cleveland.com/dining/index.ssf/2015/02/heinens_downtown_supermarket_i.html

It looks pretty nice, but there are also advantages to have multiple smaller bodega type places instead, as downtown Pittsburgh soon will have. They can likely be more nimble and provide competetion and possibly more variety of brands among them. Also it looks like a large portion of that Cleveland store is beer and wine.

The disadvantage of the multiple, smaller markets in Pgh is probably that they will be less likely to draw in customers from the office worker crowd. And the prices are likely higher, but I'm betting that the downtown residents are less price conscious than suburban shoppers.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by ks2006

Also it looks like a large portion of that Cleveland store is beer and wine.

Uhh yeah...

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

... and (unfortunately) killing the hotel developer's bid to buy the August Wilson Center.

The Peduto Administration did not kill the bid though. Peduto did the politically-smart thing by supporting the foundations' position to keep the center (and real estate) under local control.

And with understanding the business practices of the developer, that position looks even better.

While staying in good graces with the African-American community was achieved, this was all about money, and related, the plans Heinz Endowments and the Cultural Trust have had for future development of the property.

[Muckk]

Originally Posted by TBone7281

I had it in the back of my mind when I was there, but I didn't see it. I had sort of assumed it would be on both sides of the bridge, but maybe not.

I was on the bridge last week for opening day and I recall seeing a regular old bike lane marker on the east side. I assume that imagery is only on the west side, southbound lane.

[daviderik]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

While staying in good graces with the African-American community was achieved.

ahhh yes. The real reason. And isn't that the most important thing? That whole corner had so much potential. The last mayor (Ravenstahl) and his unseemly backdoor business deals ruined our opportunity to have a Times Square style video board on the new transportation center. Could have been a nice little night spot. It's amazing anything get done in this town.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by daviderik

ahhh yes. The real reason. And isn't that the most important thing? That whole corner had so much potential. The last mayor (Ravenstahl) and his unseemly backdoor business deals ruined our opportunity to have a Times Square style video board on the new transportation center. Could have been a nice little night spot. It's amazing anything get done in this town.

???

Nice try, but that wasn't the real reason.

And if you're going to quote me and edit my post at least make it a complete sentence, please.

Peduto is not going to go against the foundation community here in Pittsburgh. They have a VERY tight alliance. Heinz Endowments and the Cultural Trust are not going to give up a highly valuable piece of downtown real estate that they put significant money into... and have a significant future revenue stream dependent on their ownership and management of it.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

The Peduto Administration did not kill the bid though.

Well, Peduto's appointees to the URA did, with Peduto vigorously supporting those efforts in the media. So I think that still counts.

Peduto did the politically-smart thing by supporting the foundations' position to keep the center (and real estate) under local control.

Certainly those foundations have a LOT of political influence. But steering land and development rights to local players who can't win in competitive bidding situations for political reasons is not exactly the sort of meritocratic development process Peduto has been promising. Rather, it is business as usual.

By the way, for the record--the hotel developers were happy to have the cultural program itself continue under independent control, with a very generous lease-back. What they really wanted was just the air rights.

While staying in good graces with the African-American community was achieved, this was all about money, and related, the plans Heinz Endowments and the Cultural Trust have had for future development of the property.

The AA community never had a monolithic view on the issue, but in any event, again it is a huge problem to steer development opportunities to local players who can't actually win competitive bidding processes. That is fundamentally what happened on the North Shore, it is happening again on the Lower Hill, and in general that sort of dynamic is precisely what Peduto needs to make a thing of the past if his words about not settling for subpar developments plans are not going to be empty.

And to be fair, Peduto has exercised some muscle with local for-profit developers, like Walnut and Buncher. But unfortunately, when it comes to other sorts of politically powerful local players, like the foundations, universities, and sports teams, Peduto appears to be following the same old paths.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

Peduto is not going to go against the foundation community here in Pittsburgh. They have a VERY tight alliance.

Right, so you are agreeing it appears Peduto's claims about development standards are empty when it comes to favoring his closest political allies. Maybe that is inevitable, but it would be nice if it was at least noted, because at some point maybe there would be enough political pushback to cause reconsideration.

Heinz Endowments and the Cultural Trust are not going to give up a highly valuable piece of downtown real estate that they put significant money into... and have a significant future revenue stream dependent on their ownership and management of it.

Of course when a property can't pay its mortgage, the bank forecloses, the property goes out to bid, and the prior investors are not the high bidders, that is exactly what is supposed to happen--they lose their investment. Getting the Mayor and his appointees to knock out the high bidder instead is awfully convenient, but again indicates that these local political favorites are playing by different rules, which in the long run is unlikely to be good for investment and development in Pittsburgh.

And incidentally, I would think at this point it would be pretty clear that when it comes to land development, The Cultural Trust specifically is not exactly a strong and reliable player. Again, it is almost as if handing development rights out to such entities without competitve bidding is not the best way to get high quality development done . . .

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Well, Peduto's appointees to the URA did, with Peduto vigorously supporting those efforts in the media. So I think that still counts.

Kind of...

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Certainly those foundations have a LOT of political influence. But steering land and development rights to local players who can't win in competitive bidding situations for political reasons is not exactly the sort of meritocratic development process Peduto has been promising. Rather, it is business as usual.

By the way, for the record--the hotel developers were happy to have the cultural program itself continue under independent control, with a very generous lease-back. What they really wanted was just the air rights.

The AA community never had a monolithic view on the issue, but in any event, again it is a huge problem to steer development opportunities to local players who can't actually win competitive bidding processes.

Well, AWC saga certainly wasn't your traditional competitive bidding process for a real estate development project... and it was not simply steered in favor of local political favoritism either.

And of course the AA community never had a monolithic view on the issue -- it's not a monolithic group. The action definitely curried favor with an influential contingent, but that ultimately was not why the action was taken.

Let's just say that if a different developer made the high bid, we'd likely see some sort of agreement in place and have a different outcome.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Right, so you are agreeing it appears Peduto's claims about development standards are empty when it comes to favoring his closest political allies. Maybe that is inevitable, but it would be nice if it was at least noted, because at some point maybe there would be enough political pushback to cause reconsideration.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with that. As strong case could be made for what you describe. All I said is that "The Peduto Administration did not kill the bid though. Peduto did the politically-smart thing by supporting the foundations' position".

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Of course when a property can't pay its mortgage, the bank forecloses, the property goes out to bid, and the prior investors are not the high bidders, that is exactly what is supposed to happen--they lose their investment. Getting the Mayor and his appointees to knock out the high bidder instead is awfully convenient, but again indicates that these local political favorites are playing by different rules, which in the long run is unlikely to be good for investment and development in Pittsburgh.

And incidentally, I would think at this point it would be pretty clear that when it comes to land development, The Cultural Trust specifically is not exactly a strong and reliable player. Again, it is almost as if handing development rights out to such entities without competitve bidding is not the best way to get high quality development done . . .

Pittsburgh, like every city, is certainly not immune from political favoritism. Though stating that the mayor/his appointees knocked out the high bidder is a major simplification of what happened. You make it sound as if it was the mayor's choice to simply grant the rights to the developer or to grant the rights to the foundations and everything would be settled. Like if the high-bidding developer was permitted to buy the foreclosed property from the bank, that would end it right there and we'd currently see a hotel under construction on top of it. That's preposterous... because it assumes the foundations and other interested parties would have just been like "ok, guess you can't win em all" and walked away... yeah right.

And again, if that high-bidder was an actual developer, we'd quite possibly see a different outcome. Having had close contact with the mayor's office for the past year and learning about some of the things involved in this case that we don't read about in the papers, I know enough to be glad the high-bidder is not involved. It definitely would not have been a positive development for the AWC, and I really don't think any of us on here would be too happy with the results.

[psuhoops123]

I always had a vision with replacing the Bayer sign with an enormous digital billboard so it can advertise any ads. I know the funding would be crazy along with maintenance but coming down from 279 into the city with a view of the skyline and bright billboard on the mount would be out of this world.