PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II - Page 889

BrianTH · #**17761** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 4:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by eschaton

We already posted about this upthread. Technically this site is in Crawford-Roberts, not Uptown, as Fifth Avenue is the border.

Random aside, but my long-term vision is the Lower Hill and Uptown will be developed such as there is basically a continuity of urban fabric at least up to Miller (my understanding is that promontory across from Roberts between Miller and Dinwiddie creates the first truly undevelopable slope between the Lower Hill and Uptown).

Austinlee · #**17762** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 7:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Yeah, if the next layer was 10-12 stories, and the next one after that 15+, this could have been nearly ideal.

On the plus side, some of that is still theoretically possible. You probably can't undo the lost opportunities in the middle layer any time soon, but we still have the back half of Gold Lot 2 and the remainder of Gold Lot 4 to work with:

Unfortunately I don't trust this development process to get any of that right either.

Yeah, totally agree with you. If Gold lot #2 and #4 don't go at least 5-10 stories I am going to be PISSED! Not that the developers care what I think but i'm just throwing that out there.

highlander206 · #**17763** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 7:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBone7281

It'll be nice to fill this lot in with something.

Street View

It's about time they get started. That design image of the future building has been on the site for five years now.

BrianTH · #**17764** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 7:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Austinlee

Yeah, totally agree with you. If Gold lot #2 and #4 don't go at least 5-10 stories I am going to be PISSED! Not that the developers care what I think but i'm just throwing that out there.

For what it is worth, the apartment building they keep talking about and then delaying, which would go between the Hyatt Place and PNC Park, is supposed to be around 10 stories with 250 units. I'm not sure I have ever seen them specify what land they would use, but I am guessing it might only be on the front portion of Lot #4 next to North Shore Drive.

Private Dick · #**17765** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 7:48 PM**

Seeing the northshore Hyatt Place got me thinking...

What buildings in Pittsburgh do you hate, are ugly, are stupid, are terrible wastes of land, etc.?

The Citizens Bank branch in the SSW is one for me that just begs the question WTF?. I mean, I believe this is the architectural definition of vomit. Who in the hell thought it was a good idea to just throw all that junk on it?

eschaton · #**17766** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 8:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Private Dick

Seeing the northshore Hyatt Place got me thinking...

What buildings in Pittsburgh do you hate, are ugly, are stupid, are terrible wastes of land, etc.?

Bovie House is pretty terrible in that the design looks like something 20-30 years old, rather than contemporary. I feel the same way about the new parts of the Hotel Indigo and the first floor of this building in Homestead.

Austinlee · #**17767** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 8:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by highlander206

It's about time they get started. That design image of the future building has been on the site for five years now.

WAY more than 5 years unfortunately.

I snapped this pic of the rendering billboard in 2008 or perhaps 2009 at the latest. That's NINE years old.

And for the record I liked this design better than the new rendering.

Private Dick · #**17768** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 8:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by eschaton

Bovie House is pretty terrible in that the design looks like something 20-30 years old, rather than contemporary. I feel the same way about the new parts of the Hotel Indigo and the first floor of this building in Homestead.

Uh yeah... all are pretty darn ugly.

I don't get the Hotel Indigo at all. I like what they were trying to do by reusing the older buildings/integration with the new portion. But it just turned out ugly.

I actually like the northernmost part of the new portion and think it could be attractive... but the tan and brown striped section is just awful. I don't get why they didn't go with one color scheme. Finish elements are lacking (glass staircase on north side just looks like a parking garage stairwell with terrible lighting... not to mention that the glass is filthy). And the street-level interaction with Highland Ave is basically nonexistent... a major lack.

BrianTH · #**17769** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 8:42 PM**

North Shore Place I and II would be high on my list. I hate pretty much everything about those buildings given the location, including their scale and cheap construction, down to the way they change the brick mix at top--which I swear they did just out of spite for when they were forced to change it from two to three stories:

Every time people complain about one of the new apartment buildings not being the best design, I think to myself it could be worse. Specifically, it could be Portal Place Apartments in Oakland:

That's a 2012 building! Sheesh.

Speaking of which, 5637 Forbes was a huge disappointment to me. It was supposed to look like this:

It ended up looking like this:

Not perhaps the worst, and certainly not the most prominent, loser of a building, but it is right across from our school so it pokes me in the eye every day.

Private Dick · #**17770** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 8:49 PM**

Oh god yes... great awful examples BrianTH.

Those are some that just get me mad every time I see them. I'm pissed off right now!

Austinlee · #**17771** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 9:01 PM**

Lol @ you guys. We should create a quick and dirty website along the lines of this: http://awkwardfamilyphotos.com/ called http://awkwardurbaninfill.com so that we can shame these developers long term.

eschaton · #**17772** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 9:20 PM**

You could do a whole photo tour of just terrible infill townhouses in Lawrenceville.

This is the one which I hate the most. I especially appreciate how their attempt to fit in with neighborhood character actually looked to remuddled messes on the street. None of the windows (or the front door) actually align one another in proportions at all. And then they stuck a fairly historic looking brick cornice detail on the top for no particular reason. All that and they initially were asking $750,000 for it.

Edit: I can't think of a better building to showcase the idiotic "outside in" way in which buildings are constructed these days. And this was even architect designed!

AFW523 · #**17773** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 9:27 PM**

I still have no idea what the hell this is.

Not to be outdone by it's neighbor down the street...

That building for christsake...I shake my head every single time. It's like they had three separate design teams working on different elements and wouldn't let them look at each other's notes.

AFW523 · #**17774** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 9:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by eschaton

You could do a whole photo tour of just terrible infill townhouses in Lawrenceville.

This is the one which I hate the most. I especially appreciate how their attempt to fit in with neighborhood character actually looked to remuddled messes on the street. None of the windows (or the front door) actually align one another in proportions at all. And then they stuck a fairly historic looking brick cornice detail on the top for no particular reason. All that and they initially were asking $750,000 for it.

Edit: I can't think of a better building to showcase the idiotic "outside in" way in which buildings are constructed these days. And this was even architect designed!

Jumping in with the glow worm house a block over...

It's not a surprise that both of them still sit empty.

GeneW · #**17775** Posted **Jan 12, 2017, 10:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by eschaton

You could do a whole photo tour of just terrible infill townhouses in Lawrenceville.

This is the one which I hate the most. I especially appreciate how their attempt to fit in with neighborhood character actually looked to remuddled messes on the street. None of the windows (or the front door) actually align one another in proportions at all. And then they stuck a fairly historic looking brick cornice detail on the top for no particular reason. All that and they initially were asking $750,000 for it.

Edit: I can't think of a better building to showcase the idiotic "outside in" way in which buildings are constructed these days. And this was even architect designed!

That's pretty bad. The windows should be at least 30% bigger than they are for the facade and why don't the second floor ones match the first and third?

eschaton · #**17776** Posted **Jan 13, 2017, 4:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AFW523

Jumping in with the glow worm house a block over...

It's not a surprise that both of them still sit empty.

I actually don't think the glow worm house is awful. The facade could be fixed if they just cut a huge window in that blank facade on the second floor. IIRC the reason it's blank is because they wanted to cram three bedrooms with closets into the house, and due to the internal layout, it meant the front bedroom's closet took up the front of the building. A conversion of the room into an office and punching through the cheap metal siding and it would be serviceable.

But again, that's a great example of how modern architecture is stuck in an "inside out" instead of "outside in" paradigm. Both houses looked great from the inside if you like modernism. But the focus of too many designs is coming up with a workable floor plan first, only figuring out what the facade will look like once the room layout is finalized. This contrasts with classic house design, which started out with the basic dimensions and figured out how to cram the living space needed inside.

BrianTH · #**17777** Posted **Jan 13, 2017, 1:34 PM**

That was part of what was so great about classic house designs like the Cape Cod, California Bungalow, and Foursquare: they both looked good outside and had a great layout (for the time) inside.

Then TVs, master baths, and walk-in closets came along and ruined everything . . . .

BrianTH · #**17778** Posted **Jan 13, 2017, 2:32 PM**

Some progress reports from Building Pittsburgh:

https://buildingpittsburgh.com/2017/01/12/confidence-is-high/

Quote:

Pitt is moving forward with early programming for a new building at the Syria Mosque site that is in the 350,000 sq. ft. range. A couple of $30 million-plus projects that have been kicking around for a while appear to be heading for a competitive hard bid. Oxford Development is rumored to be close to a major tenant announcement for its Riverfront West project at 3 Crossings. In Oakland, Campus Advantage will be bidding its 300,000 sq. ft. apartment project on Forbes Avenue. Murland Associates selected Mascaro Construction as contractor for its proposed 97,000 sq. ft., $15-18 million office at 3422 Forbes Avenue.

Those last two Oakland projects are basically across the street from each other:

eschaton · #**17779** Posted **Jan 13, 2017, 2:51 PM**

Apparently the Addison Terrace redevelopment is completely maxed out, and the developer is proposing to the URA moving 58 replacement units to Homewood. I presume the area under discussion is totally separate from the land set aside south of Hamilton for a few dozen infill townhouses. I'm not sure where they plan on putting these units - Hamilton does not have acres of empty space along its frontage. Perhaps some existing abandoned buildings are being included in the deal. It looks like there is some local opposition to the plan however, as it calls for rental housing while local residents want more homeowner occupants in the neighborhood.

Also, the zoning report for February 2 is online. Not really much going on here - typical mixture of carports, privacy fences, and sign permits, with a few standalone projects constructing or expanding existing buildings mixed in. There seems to be some odd drama involving the last item on the list however, with a South Side restaurant appealing an order to stop ongoing construction work.

eschaton · #**17780** Posted **Jan 13, 2017, 2:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrianTH

I'm pretty sure that rendering is out of date. IIRC they successfully expanded their building envelope to take in the Arby's site. It doesn't seem like the sale of that property has been finalized yet (at least according to the Allegheny County Assessor's site) so maybe that fell through.