PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Minivan Werner

I wonder what the actual cost was of creating Penn Circle in the first place?

I'm sure the direct costs were significant when adjusted for inflation, but probably the biggest cost was all the associated demolition of historic buildings. According to this site, there was a net loss of approximately 1 million sqft:

http://www.eastliberty.org/about-east-liberty/history

Edit: By the way, the article I linked previously had a note on bike lanes:

This final stretch would convert former Penn Circle North and Penn Circle West, now called Station Street and South Euclid. The project includes three smart traffic signals and bike lanes to allow safe routes for pedestrians and cyclists.

I'd like bike lanes straight through East Liberty on Penn, but if they instead circled around to link up with the bike lanes on East LIberty Blvd and Centre, that would not be so bad. I believe Highland is already a sharrow route (perhaps upgradeable with a bike lane in the future), which would take you into the heart of East Liberty, and if you wanted to bypass East Liberty you could take East Liberty Boulevard over to the Bakery Square trails.

Edit #2: Oh, and I still like the idea of some day continuing Station past Broad and over a new bridge which then some sort of linkage to Penn. If you incorporate bike lanes into that it would further shorten such an East Liberty bypass.

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

According to this site, there was a net loss of approximately 1 million sqft:

http://www.eastliberty.org/about-east-liberty/history

Staggering... that's like losing an Allegheny Center.

[dfiler]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

The URA is seeking $7.7 million in federal grants to complete the process of un-doing Penn Circle (this would finish off Station Street, formerly Penn Circle N, and Euclid, formerly Penn Circle W):

http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/9217711-74/penn-circle-streets

TribLive is now reporting it as $9M to undo some more of Penn Circle!
http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/9217711-74/penn-circle-streets#axzz3nsgOeTQO

The article seems to fixate on 1-way vs 2-way streets. To me that seems to miss the more meaningful differences of possible city structures.

The current 1-way streets are automobile centric to such a degree that it creates an unpleasant area to be in. Maximum car throughput was prioritized over everything else. As a result, people don't want to be there and thus businesses don't either. People simply don't like to hang out or walk along a high-speed street that is structured to work like a highway.

While the proposed new street design is 2-way, more important is that the entire urban fabric is being considered rather than simply optimized car throughput. Pedestrians and bicycles are being accommodated as well as through traffic. The result will be a neighborhood that is pleasant to be in. Businesses will want to locate there and customers will enjoy going to those businesses. The streetscape will be enjoyable rather than something to be endured when rushing to or from your parked car.

This type of urban design can be done with either 1-way or 2-way streets. With that said, I too think returning Penn Circle to 2-way streets will be beneficial to the neighborhood. More important though is the complete streets concept. Design the entire neighborhood experience instead of simply optimizing traffic throughput.

[wpipkins2]

Originally Posted by dfiler

I agree, continuing what was done through DT East Liberty would be a welcome change. Or at least it makes sense to have a continuous street structure, whatever that optimal structure is.

It doesn't seem like the 4 lanes of traffic with a raised median and rounded on/off ramps is what was historically there. It also doesn't fit with the surrounding urban neighborhood. The one block stretch of highway between Negley and Euclid is pretty preposterous when viewed in context.

I'm guessing the type of development planned would determine the need for four lanes. If the developer is planning additional big box retail then four lanes is needed. The traffic around Target at Penn and Center Ave is horrendous at times.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by dfiler

TribLive is now reporting it as $9M to undo some more of Penn Circle!

Just to clarify, I believe that includes a local contribution of $1.5M to go with the federal $7.7M.

The article seems to fixate on 1-way vs 2-way streets. To me that seems to miss the more meaningful differences of possible city structures.

I agree entirely this is really more about complete streets than any one thing, but I think that whole "one-way Penn Circle" thing has become a sort of symbolic shorthand for the entire Penn Circle concept.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by wpipkins2

I'm guessing the type of development planned would determine the need for four lanes. If the developer is planning additional big box retail then four lanes is needed. The traffic around Target at Penn and Center Ave is horrendous at times.

Four continuous lanes on city streets turn out to be a lot less helpful than many people assume (indeed, sometimes they are actually counterproductive to total vehicle flow, because you increase traffic-slowing "conflicts" as people try to change lanes in congested situations).

The real key is usually good intersection design.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by dfiler

It doesn't seem like the 4 lanes of traffic with a raised median and rounded on/off ramps is what was historically there. It also doesn't fit with the surrounding urban neighborhood. The one block stretch of highway between Negley and Euclid is pretty preposterous when viewed in context.

My point is the street was always wide, as opposed to East Liberty Boulevard, where they actually demolished everything on the South Side of what was then Margetta to create the eastbound lanes.

[eschaton]

Regarding the final demise of Penn Circle, I think it's likely that the final steps will not be as immediately transformative as the conversion of Centre was. I say this because the Centre side bordered on high-density areas of Shadyside with a lot of potential pedestrians. Station Street's north side, in contrast, is mostly taken up by parking lots barring one block, and the Euclid section is mostly non-residential as well. Clearly there's going to have to be substantive infill, eliminating the "moat" of no development for these pedestrian connections to matter.

I also think improving road connections within the former Penn Circle is key. Broad Street should run through Garland Parklet, and be fixed around "Indigo Square." Harvard and Kirkwood should continue through to S Euclid. S Beatty and Sheridan Avenue should continue through to Station Street. A few oof the smaller, useless streets (Ansley Place, Breckett St.) should be vacated.

[JVC]

penn circle, bike lanes, two-way streets, enright parklet - what is missing from this conversation?

PENN SQUARE - great cities have great public squares

http://www.pps.org/reference/uscanadasquares/

manhattan has madison square, union square, washington square, tompkins square to name a just a few



in addition to fixing penn circle and saving enright parklet the city needs to rip up the stupid parking lot
across the street from target and turn it into a public square - PENN SQUARE







"PPS was retained by a local organization to study the park and make recommendations on a proposed redesign. What we discovered through our observations, surveys and workshop results was that nearly all of the key attributes of a great public space are present in Washington Square Park. First identified in the research of William Whyte’s Street Life Project (and later refined and expanded upon through PPS’s work), these attributes are:

People engaged in a wide range of activities and uses;
Diversity of ages and balance of genders;
People present in groups as well as alone;
Most parts of the park are used (there are few empty or unused areas);
Well-used at all different times of day and week, even during poor weather conditions."

[wpipkins2]

Originally Posted by JVC

penn circle, bike lanes, two-way streets, enright parklet - what is missing from this conversation?

PENN SQUARE - great cities have great public squares

http://www.pps.org/reference/uscanadasquares/

manhattan has madison square, union square, washington square, tompkins square to name a just a few



in addition to fixing penn circle and saving enright parklet the city needs to rip up the stupid parking lot
across the street from target and turn it into a public square - PENN SQUARE







"PPS was retained by a local organization to study the park and make recommendations on a proposed redesign. What we discovered through our observations, surveys and workshop results was that nearly all of the key attributes of a great public space are present in Washington Square Park. First identified in the research of William Whyte’s Street Life Project (and later refined and expanded upon through PPS’s work), these attributes are:

People engaged in a wide range of activities and uses;

Diversity of ages and balance of genders;

People present in groups as well as alone;

Most parts of the park are used (there are few empty or unused areas);

Well-used at all different times of day and week, even during poor weather conditions."

Market Square

Mellon Square

Schenley Plaza

[eschaton]

I think the block in question is around the right size for a public square in East Liberty. But I don't think the location is great. There's storefronts along Broad and Sheridan, which is good. But Kirkwood has become a glorified alley along that block. Facades couldn't be returned to Kirkwood without extensive retrofitting. That stretch of Target isn't the best from an active pedestrian standpoint either.

East Liberty's public square already exists - it's the grounds of East Liberty Presbyterian. It's a shame it has such limited open space, and that the church decided to hardscape most of the area fronting on Penn Avenue, but that block is the obvious focal point of the community.

If I were to design a new public square, I'd put it somewhere in the Northwest quadrant of Penn Circle. Mostly because everything north of Kirkwood and west of Whitfield is essentially a blank slate now, meaning new high-density development could say surround this lot and tie together quite well.

[JVC]

duplicate post

[JVC]

Originally Posted by wpipkins2

Market Square

Mellon Square

Schenley Plaza

all great spaces indeed, especially market square

pittsburgh needs more public squares and that parking lot in east liberty is a perfect location
because the city already owns the lot, the multi-story buildings on the perimeter already define the space
and it would give new residents an opportunity to mix with established residents

Originally Posted by eschaton

If I were to design a new public square, I'd put it somewhere in the Northwest quadrant of Penn Circle. Mostly because everything north of Kirkwood and west of Whitfield is essentially a blank slate now, meaning new high-density development could say surround this lot and tie together quite well.

that lot is being partially leased by the hotel indigo

http://www.post-gazette.com/business/dev...iberty-Hotel-Indigo/stories/201507250069

Originally Posted by eschaton

I think the block in question is around the right size for a public square in East Liberty. But I don't think the location is great. There's storefronts along Broad and Sheridan, which is good. But Kirkwood has become a glorified alley along that block. Facades couldn't be returned to Kirkwood without extensive retrofitting.

which is exactly why a park would work great in that location
when you're in the park or driving by it then you wouldn't be focused on the row of back doors on kirkwood

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by JVC

which is exactly why a park would work great in that location
when you're in the park or driving by it then you wouldn't be focused on the row of back doors on kirkwood

My point is that for a successful public square you really should have active street (or rather sidewalk) life on all surrounding blocks. This means being fringed with retail storefronts, offices, or fairly high density residential.

Don't get me wrong, a park is a big step up from a parking lot, and it would be great to have an actual public park (in East Liberty the parks tend to be tucked away in forgettable quasi-private locations instead). I'm just not sure that location in particular would draw a lot of foot traffic, unless there were other reasons people were already walking on the nearby sidewalks.

[JVC]

Originally Posted by eschaton

My point is that for a successful public square you really should have active street (or rather sidewalk) life on all surrounding blocks. This means being fringed with retail storefronts, offices, or fairly high density residential.

Don't get me wrong, a park is a big step up from a parking lot, and it would be great to have an actual public park (in East Liberty the parks tend to be tucked away in forgettable quasi-private locations instead). I'm just not sure that location in particular would draw a lot of foot traffic, unless there were other reasons people were already walking on the nearby sidewalks.

maybe a nice, inviting public square would make those streets more active

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Regarding the final demise of Penn Circle, I think it's likely that the final steps will not be as immediately transformative as the conversion of Centre was. I say this because the Centre side bordered on high-density areas of Shadyside with a lot of potential pedestrians. Station Street's north side, in contrast, is mostly taken up by parking lots barring one block, and the Euclid section is mostly non-residential as well. Clearly there's going to have to be substantive infill, eliminating the "moat" of no development for these pedestrian connections to matter.

Yeah, I think it is fair to say this falls into the category of preparing those sites for development. It will be interesting to see if it actually gets federal grants under those circumstances, or instead needs to wait for more infill first.

[greg42]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Shell is putting up $69 million for a new water intake and treatment plant in Center Township (that's about 96% of the total cost), which is a necessary step in preparing the possible ethane cracker site:

http://powersource.post-gazette.com/powe...ets-for-101-million/stories/201510060191

The article also mentions they plan to spend $80 million on soil remediation.

Shell still hasn't committed to building the cracker, but investments like these are nice even if it doesn't get built.

Ya grabbed the wrong link there looks like, it's this one:

http://powersource.post-gazette.com/powe...ew-water-facilities/stories/201510060202

I read about the soil remediation earlier and it seems like it will take years, so it's clear that while they continue to prep the site there isn't going to be a cracker there for who knows how many more years even if they do build it. Possibly the soil remediation needn't be complete to start some of the other things.

They definitely can and do bail on projects after large investments. Look at what they just did with Alaska. I guess they haven't completely ditched Alaska exploration but have stopped for the foreseeable future. But, bailing on Alaska may mean they look to do other projects like this.

There's nothing negative really about the site prep though, given what was on most of it before. If Shell bails then it will be however far prepped for something else, although it will be a big disappointment for Beaver County if not the wider area.

[Wave]

Originally Posted by eschaton

My point is that for a successful public square you really should have active street (or rather sidewalk) life on all surrounding blocks. This means being fringed with retail storefronts, offices, or fairly high density residential.

Don't get me wrong, a park is a big step up from a parking lot, and it would be great to have an actual public park (in East Liberty the parks tend to be tucked away in forgettable quasi-private locations instead). I'm just not sure that location in particular would draw a lot of foot traffic, unless there were other reasons people were already walking on the nearby sidewalks.

Don't forget that the Alphabet City development would take out about 1/3 or more of the buildings on the east side end of the Kirkland "alley" (and Penn). Since that development is still on the drawing boards, there would still be time for the developer to incorporate the plan to orient retail perhaps towards a new park. That would eliminate some of the Kirkwood issues.

Furthermore, it would be a windfall for the remaining property owners along Kirkland who would now have a dual retail exposure on both the Penn and Kirkland sides. That would either add value to their property or make those remaining properties more appealing to development in the future.

On the flip side, that lot is ripe for development as is, with everything else going on in the neighborhood and if an urban style park is to be built perhaps better as part of infill on the west edge of East Liberty.

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Shell is putting up $69 million for a new water intake and treatment plant in Center Township (that's about 96% of the total cost), which is a necessary step in preparing the possible ethane cracker site:

http://powersource.post-gazette.com/powe...ets-for-101-million/stories/201510060191

The article also mentions they plan to spend $80 million on soil remediation.

Shell still hasn't committed to building the cracker, but investments like these are nice even if it doesn't get built.

That excitement actually scares me. After selling houses throughout Beaver County for 9 years, that is ONE municipality that is getting a much needed water treatment upgrade out of 52 municipalities in the county. Now Center Twp water does feed like 4 municipalities, Center, Monaca, Potter and I think Raccoon Twp but still. BC needs billions in upgrades that just ain't there. This is a great project but I can assure you that it won't bring back the 15 or so decaying river towns that are in rough shape.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by eschaton

East Liberty's public square already exists - it's the grounds of East Liberty Presbyterian. It's a shame it has such limited open space, and that the church decided to hardscape most of the area fronting on Penn Avenue, but that block is the obvious focal point of the community.

I agree, and I think you could give it the Market Square treatment--turn the roads and sidewalks into one level space using different hardscape and fixtures to mark different zones, including possible outdoor cafe sections around the perimeter.

I believe the area north of the church grounds along Penn is already a parklet, but you could make it into much more of a public plaza with this approach (and maybe some help from the church--I'm not sure where the property line is drawn). The triangular area at Whitfield and Baum also has a lot of potential if you can eliminate that cut-through.

Bingo-bango, you go from a church-island surrounded by streets to a European-style cathedral square.