PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown III

[eschaton]

5/31 Planning Commission presentation is up...but it isn't much. The only new item is exterior renovations for 625 Liberty Avenue (The EQT Building). This is limited to changing the front entrance to something a little more open and less dated - probably needed, because I used to walk by the building all the time, and it has a street presence of a fortress at the ground level. The new entrance seems to have a very subtle Art Deco vibe to me, though that may be accidental.

The Commission will also be voting on the two big downtown residential projects introduced two weeks ago. I've also looked at the Plan of Lots, and it looks like a fairly big infill project in Garfield (taking up almost an entire block) is coming soon.

[eschaton]

June 16 ZBA is up. And although there isn't much of note, there is one medium-sized project - a 24-unit new apartment building on Liberty Avenue in the Strip District. The apartment building will replace a mid-block one-story metal warehouse. It's a very basic design - a ground-floor garage topped by four floors of residential. This part of the Strip is not zoned RIV, meaning no 50% parking reduction. They use the bicycle parking requirements to reduce it to 17, but it's hard to do anything with a first floor with this many spaces. I wish they did not include garage entrances off both the alley and Liberty however, both for the safety of the residents and because it won't help make for a more inviting streetscape. The design itself is very meh/generic, though there's no true renderings here, and the design will likely work better once the rest of the block is (eventually) filled out). They're only asking for one special exception, so I presume this will sail through.

[deja vu]

Originally Posted by eschaton

5/31 Planning Commission presentation is up...but it isn't much. The only new item is exterior renovations for 625 Liberty Avenue (The EQT Building). This is limited to changing the front entrance to something a little more open and less dated - probably needed, because I used to walk by the building all the time, and it has a street presence of a fortress at the ground level. The new entrance seems to have a very subtle Art Deco vibe to me, though that may be accidental.

I'm not loving that proposed entry portal for EQT. Especially if it only occurs at that on location, and it's not a repeating element across the façade. I get that they probably want to emphasize that "this is the main entry". I get that the monolithic 80's architecture is imposing. I get that there are some parallels between the art deco and post-modern styles. It just seems out of context with the rest of the building. No denying it is eye-catching though, and maybe that's enough.

[shantyside]

was in sliberty the other day so i decided to check out what's happening at the maverick hotel that replaced the ace hotel

Former Ace Hotel in East Liberty reopens with new name, new management

https://triblive.com/local/former-ac...ew-management/

the bar is gone, the dining room is walled off from the lobby and there wasn't a soul in the place - think it's safe to say Kasa at the Maverick is not doing well

[dfiler]

Originally Posted by shantyside

was in sliberty the other day so i decided to check out what's happening at the maverick hotel that replaced the ace hotel

Former Ace Hotel in East Liberty reopens with new name, new management

https://triblive.com/local/former-ac...ew-management/

the bar is gone, the dining room is walled off from the lobby and there wasn't a soul in the place - think it's safe to say Kasa at the Maverick is not doing well

If the website is any indication, this new hotel will go under very soon. It doesn't show a single picture of the outside, the lobby or anything that makes the building special. All it shows are some over-processed photos of guest rooms that look fake and like any other hotel at the same time.

https://kasa.com/properties/kasa-the...Business=false

[BenM]

It looks like the company primarily serves as a source of Airbnb style accommodations. If the rental/condo development they offer rooms in doesn't provide amenities to the community as a whole, it's not going to be offered for the rooms they have at the property.

I don't think "Paid Street Parking Nearby" (the only amenity they have listed for the East Liberty site) is all that enticing.

[eschaton]

In just-barely-out-of-the-city news, Q Development has bought the vacant St. Francis complex in Millvale, and will put between 125 and 250 apartment units on the site. It appears this will mostly involve adaptive reuse of the main structure, which once housed 300 nuns.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by eschaton

In just-barely-out-of-the-city news, Q Development has bought the vacant St. Francis complex in Millvale, and will put between 125 and 250 apartment units on the site. It appears this will mostly involve adaptive reuse of the main structure, which once housed 300 nuns.

Although they are just in the early planning stages, there is a LOT of potential at that site. It is up on a hilltop actually overlooking Millvale, with a park-like area leading down to the town, through a cool stone entrance:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/bp...!4d-79.9718187

https://www.google.com/maps/place/bp...!4d-79.9718187

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4906...7i16384!8i8192

The article also says they are going to try to connect to the river trail, and I am honestly not sure how that is supposed to work.

Anyway, the complex has a really pretty chapel:



It has been an important landmark for a long time:



Anyway, I hope they do a nice job!

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Although they are just in the early planning stages, there is a LOT of potential at that site. It is up on a hilltop actually overlooking Millvale, with a park-like area leading down to the town, through a cool stone entrance:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/bp...!4d-79.9718187

https://www.google.com/maps/place/bp...!4d-79.9718187

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4906...7i16384!8i8192

The article also says they are going to try to connect to the river trail, and I am honestly not sure how that is supposed to work.

Anyway, the complex has a really pretty chapel:



It has been an important landmark for a long time:



Anyway, I hope they do a nice job!

In some ways the location within Millvale isn't the best, because it's at the far northern end, away from the riverfront and the most active portion of the business district (It would take something like 20 minutes to get to the core of the business district). That said, I suppose this will add more vitality to the more sleepy northern portion of Millvale.

[colemonkee]

That chapel is beautiful!

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by eschaton

In some ways the location within Millvale isn't the best, because it's at the far northern end, away from the riverfront and the most active portion of the business district (It would take something like 20 minutes to get to the core of the business district). That said, I suppose this will add more vitality to the more sleepy northern portion of Millvale.

Yeah, it is not what I would consider to be a very walkable location, in the sense of it being easy to walk from there to amenities and such.

But the setting itself is lovely, and there are always ride share services and such (I wonder if those electric scooters could handle the hill . . . ).

[eschaton]

The recommended changes to the Oakland Plan are now online. I skimmed through and they're honestly largely superficial elements which involve minor changes to language (aside from a few things like bird-safe glazing). I didn't see any change to the proposed zoning at all. I have a feeling this will not satisfy the OPDC NIMBY faction at all.

[eschaton]

6/14 Planning Commission presentation has dropped. There are two new items, and one returning item worth discussion.

1. A new sign permit for Oxford Centre downtown. Looks like a PWC logo. Meh.

2. Residential conversion for 1 Market Street. I believe this building has been used for offices up until now. There's very little information here, but it seems like it will be a 5-unit project, with each floor an entire two-bedroom unit. The first floor will remain a commercial storefront.

The big news though is the return of the Oakland Plan. The presentation is quite long, and I won't go into the non-zoning changes. A few zoning changes were made however. These are:

1. A small section of Central Oakland north of Louisa between Atwood and Meyran was changed from UC-E to R-MU. This is a downgrade in density/height limits, but probably for the best since UC-E continues to ban almost all residential uses, and the block is entirely residential right now. Honestly this should have been extended a few blocks further.

2. Two areas had maximum heights dropped (though not heights by right). The area zoned UC-E south of Forbes will now have a max height of 120 (as 210) and the UC-MU area around Boulevard of the Allies west of Bates will have a max height of 120 (was 185).

3. A number of bad decisions on parking. There will be minimal surface parking allowed with larger residential buildings zoned UC-MU (up to 10 spaces), and the requirement that garages become convertible to other uses was eliminated. In addition, affordable housing is exempted from EV parking requirements.

4. The absolutely terrible decision to ban new residential from UC-E (the core of Oakland) unless 100% affordable or less than 50% of the gross floor area of a mixed-use building remains in effect. Though at least various forms of housing for the elderly/assisted living are now included by right.

[Don't Be That Guy]

Originally Posted by eschaton

6/14 Planning Commission presentation has dropped. There are two new items, and one returning item worth discussion.

1. A new sign permit for Oxford Centre downtown. Looks like a PWC logo. Meh.

2. Residential conversion for 1 Market Street. I believe this building has been used for offices up until now. There's very little information here, but it seems like it will be a 5-unit project, with each floor an entire two-bedroom unit. The first floor will remain a commercial storefront.

The big news though is the return of the Oakland Plan. The presentation is quite long, and I won't go into the non-zoning changes. A few zoning changes were made however. These are:

1. A small section of Central Oakland north of Louisa between Atwood and Meyran was changed from UC-E to R-MU. This is a downgrade in density/height limits, but probably for the best since UC-E continues to ban almost all residential uses, and the block is entirely residential right now. Honestly this should have been extended a few blocks further.

2. Two areas had maximum heights dropped (though not heights by right). The area zoned UC-E south of Forbes will now have a max height of 120 (as 210) and the UC-MU area around Boulevard of the Allies west of Bates will have a max height of 120 (was 185).

3. A number of bad. There will be minimal surface parking allowed with larger residential buildings zoned UC-MU (up to 10 spaces), and the requirement that garages become convertible to other uses was eliminated. In addition, affordable housing is exempted from EV parking requirements.

4. The absolutely terrible decision to ban new residential from UC-E (the core of Oakland) unless 100% affordable or less than 50% of the gross floor area of a mixed-use building remains in effect. Though at least various forms of housing for the elderly/assisted living are now included by right.

This is bad and just confirms that the city is heading down the wrong road in terms of planning and development. Every major zoning initiative has resulted in decreased densities, ridiculous and difficult to achieve bonus points the deter density and height and using "affordable housing" as a deterrent to new development in the neighborhoods that most need new housing. Add to this the Planning Commission and Council going full NIMBY with preservation nominations and you can see that Peduto really flubbed by allowing activists to dictate policy.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Don't Be That Guy

This is bad and just confirms that the city is heading down the wrong road in terms of planning and development. Every major zoning initiative has resulted in decreased densities, ridiculous and difficult to achieve bonus points the deter density and height and using "affordable housing" as a deterrent to new development in the neighborhoods that most need new housing. Add to this the Planning Commission and Council going full NIMBY with preservation nominations and you can see that Peduto really flubbed by allowing activists to dictate policy.

It's a step back from the original plan, but it's not really a step back from the current zoning. Going through the major changes from the status quo:

1. Max heights by right aren't lowered anywhere other than a small portion of McKee Place (from 85 to 40), and raised in a number of places (40 to 65 on Halket, 60 to 85 in Oakland Portal area, 60 to 65 feet along Boulevard of the Allies, etc).

2. Maximum heights with special exceptions/bonuses are taller than what's currently allowed just about everywhere.

3. The new R-MU and UC-MU are both pretty broad-based mixed-use zoning which will allow for a mixture of residential and commercial uses, rather than single-use zoning.

4. Residential parking minimums have been cut in half.

While there are a ton of new design guidelines for developers to jump through, all of this should mean there's way less ability for NIMBYs to block projects provided developers do their homework, because no variances will really be needed. Though as I said, it really is inexplicable why they decided banning new market-rate residential buildings from the core of Central Oakland was a good idea. Are they stuck in the pre-COVID paradigm that there will actually be enough demand for new office highrises in Oakland to fill it in? Or do they really just want Pitt to buy out everything?

[pj3000]

Basic site plan and rendering of the 19th Street area of the planned Allegheny Shores development on the Sharpsburg and O'Hara riverfront. I missed the news that Mosites applied for a $24.4M federal infrastructure grant for the project in April. Word is that this is being treated by The Mosites Co. as their "legacy".

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Basic site plan and rendering of the 19th Street area of the planned Allegheny Shores development on the Sharpsburg and O'Hara riverfront. I missed the news that Mosites applied for a $24.4M federal infrastructure grant for the project in April. Word is that this is being treated by The Mosites Co. as their "legacy".

It feels like this project has been through a gazillion different designs. This one is a little basic, but that is OK with me if the dang thing actually happens.

[eschaton]

Still early on, but Walnut Capital has dropped its proposed project for the Boulevard of the Allies site now occupied by the vacant Quality Inn will be a 426-unit apartment building - and (unfortunately) a 445-stall garage. It will be 10 stories, also including a new 33,000 full-service grocery store and 8,000 square feet of other retail. 10% of the units will be affordable, as previously agreed to. Sounds like Strada is the architect.

Seems like if City Council votes in favor of the zoning changes already agreed to for Halket (which are happening on an accelerated schedule compared to the rest of the Oakland plan) it will be allowed by right, though of course the Planning Commission will still review the project.

[eschaton]

Well, the Oakland Plan passed the Planning Commission. However, they attached three additional conditions upon the zoning.

1. In what appears to be a toothless sop to Coltart Street (the most powerful NIMBYs in Pittsburgh!) they added a condition that the planning department provide information to City Council that there is no deleterious effect on the street being limited to 40 feet but being surrounded by blocks with max heights of 95 to 120 feet.

2. They said the 400-foot-long building allowance was too long and recommended staff suggest a different maximum.

3. Parking garages of over 50 spaces must be approved by the Planning Commission (this is fine IMHO).

Deitrick was opposed anyway, which doesn't surprise me, since she nakedly just represents her interest as an Oakland NIMBY on the commission.

[eschaton]

This is interesting - seven members of OPDC's board resigned due to conflicts with Wanda Wilson.

The subtext I'm getting here is they're pissed at the dictatorial, combative, direction she has taken the organization. I am also presuming that the board members resigning are less anti-development, but that is just a supposition at this point.